PDA

View Full Version : Chapter 7 Revision



Raesene Andu
04-25-2004, 12:26 PM
Well now that I'm not quite as busy at work as I have been (well, ok I worked for 11+ hours on friday, but I have a holiday on monday) I have begun a revision of chapter 7. I've already given some of the flavour text a working over, but would like some comments and suggestion on what people would like to see changed added...

Here are a few things already slated for addition (suggestion on additional material needed welcome)....

- More of the info from Book of Magecraft on sources and leylines, + EXAMPLES!!
- New realm spells (I'll post info on these before finalising the revision)
- Random tables for determining NPC or PC realm spells known OR, at the very least a list of all the spells before their descriptions. Very useful as anyone who is looking up spells for their spellcaster knows.
- Expanding the info on magic potential to include info on restoring magic potential and so forth.

Things I'm tossing up changing. (Comments welcome)....

- Limited to 1 realm spell known/caster level (so max of 20 realm spells for a 20th level character). Sorcerers gain a realm spell/level, wizards and other classes must research their realm spells (sorcerers find it easier to tap into the mebhaighl to cast these spells).
- Change descriptions to make them easier to read (i.e. similar to old system, with just Level, Regency, Gold, Required Holding, and Duration.
- Change spells to link to caster level, not spell level. Spellcasters cannot learn or cast spells higher than their caster level.
- Balance changes to some spell (comment really wanted here!!!!)
- More to be decided later.

I'll bring you up to date with more info shortly, as it comes to hand so to speak.

Raesene Andu
04-26-2004, 07:49 AM
Here is an example of the new format used for Realm spells.

Abundant Harvest
(Transmutation)

Caster Level: Divine [Erik, Sera] 2
Gold: 1 GB
Regency: 4 RP/province
Duration: 1 month
Required Holding: Temple 2

With this spell, the priest can call on her deity to grant the people of a province an additional harvest for a single season. The spell affects the growth of any grains, fruit trees, or vegetables, and these crops mature and ripen in the space of only one to two weeks, instead of months.
This abundant harvest can either alleviate a famine, or be used to increase the taxation income of the province. Any province under the effect of this spell produces additional tax monies equal to half its normal seasonal collection (rounded down). All regents who would normally collect an income from the affected province gain this benefit.
For every four levels of experience, the caster can affect one additional province, although she must have at least a level 2 temple holding in each of the provinces affected. This spell can only be cast during the spring months, and no more than once per year.


The new format contains basically the same information, but I've made it simpler to make it easier to read. There is no reason why realm spells have to be in the same format as normal spells. Certainly no reason to include Target, Saving Throw, or Spell resistance as those values are almost identical for every realm spell, a simple covering paragraph at the start of the descriptions can replace that information and anything out of the ordinary can go in the spell's description. Having a different format for realm spell descriptions also helps to underline that they are very different and don't follow the same rules as normal spells.

By the way, this is one of the new spell I have planned for addition to the BRCS. I have another 25-30 more. Most are priest, or rather specific to one god (like this), but I have a few new arcane ones as well. I plan to release the whole list for comments and editing before finalising it, I just have to finish writing the descriptions first. After quite a lot of work over the past 2 days, I've added in another 18 pages of information (although it might end up less than this after trimming some of the spell descriptions and reformatting).

tcharazazel
04-26-2004, 08:14 AM
I really like the new spell descriptions. They look really good :) I'm really interested in finding out what those other new deity specific realm spells are too.

Also just curious, arent most famines in the summer or fall? (if theyre in winter then they would just have to wait a season)

So as the spell can only be cast in spring (which makes sense as thats when the harvest is planted generally) Maybe the benefit of the added revenues can only be gained if the spell is cast in Spring.

However, the benefit of alieving famine would apply once the spell is cast during any season aside from winter? Just curious if that would make some more sense.

Anyway, back to the list for things slated for addition and up for change. I think they all make sense really, however, I dont think that the need for random tables of spells for people to roll for isnt really needed. Heh, people would just argue about the percentage chance that person would be likely to know such and such spell, and then you would have to cinsider that youd have to do it in tiers including al those spells below them along with all spells in that level... way too big a table really. Otherwise, just tell people if they want to make it random just assign each spell a number and roll a die or dice to see what they get. Unless you want to emphasize how common some realm spells are... then I suppose it could make sense to make those random tables... tho they still wouldnt be a lot of fun to make I imagine... good luck in any case.

Raesene Andu
04-26-2004, 08:36 AM
If it was a famine that last for mutiple years then it would make sense, but the main reason I added this spell was because I was thinking of adding another realm spell called Famine :) So this would be the counter for it...

I'll probably drop the idea of random tables for generating realm spell and just go with a single table that DMs can pick the spells from, makes just as much sense.

As for a list of new deity specific spells, I haven't finished finalising them yet, but there will be at least 1 per deity, perhaps 2 or 3 for some gods.

A very quick list would read...
Abundent Harvest (Erik/Sera)
Animal Horde (Erik)
Avani's Peace (Avani)
Banish the Shadow
Blessed Trade (Sera)
Bless Holding
Bloodlust (Belinik)
Communion
Consecrate Relic
Conversion
Cure Plague
Dead Seas (Nesirie)
Dishonest Dealings (Eloele)
Haelyn's Standard (Haelyn)
Healing Touch
Holy Crusade (Haelyn, Cuiraecen)
Laerme's Emisary (Laerme)
Magical Tithe
Maintain Armies
Mebhaighl Touch (Ruornil)
Mighty Forest (Erik)
Nesirie's Blessing (Nesirie)
One True Faith
Renewal (Arcane/Ruornil)
Ruornil's Warding (Ruornil)
Shield Army
Siege Wall
Stormlord (Cuiraecen)
Thieve's Gateway (Eloele)
True Believer
Ward Realm
Winter's Fury (Kriesha)
+ new arcane spells.

Some are new spells, some are old ones omited from the original BRCS. Still considering which to include, and working on others. That this are the one's I've added so far.

tcharazazel
04-26-2004, 09:09 AM
OOoo... heheh, I wont ask you what they all are yet as I bet youre busy, though I am really interested in finding out more about the Neserie specific ones you have planned, namely Dead Seas, and Neserie's Blessing. (or is my guess correct that they are like the sea version of abundant harvest and famine?) Or does Dead Seas just prevent all sailing in the sea zones aflicted? heheh, love trying to figure things out especially at this hour... hmm.

one thing though, would you put in any realm spells for the other dieties, like the Cold Rider, or Moradin?

Raesene Andu
04-26-2004, 09:32 AM
Dead Seas effecivly prevents all sailing through the sea zones adjacent to the province where it's cast. Nesire's Blessing is one of the spell's I've finished, so the description is below...

Nesirieís Blessing
(Transmutation)

Caster Level: Divine [Nesirie] 2
Gold: 2 GB
Regency: 2 RP/vessel
Duration: 2 months + 1 month/3 levels
Required Holding: Temple 4

When victory in war depends on the safe arrival of an invasion fleet, or when a merchant companyís future depend on the success of a trading mission, the favour of the goddess of the sea is vital. Nesirieís clerics use this spell to protect the fleets of allied merchants and nations.
The spell calms the oceans in a fleetís path, ensures favourable winds, and increases each individual shipís seaworthiness by 25%. While under the protection of this spell, the ships in the fleet will never encounter gale force winds, or be becalmed, and storms will always pass them by.

I have a couple of other spells still under consideration for Belinik, Kriesha, and Moradin, plus some goblin and orog specific ones that may or may not make it in the final version. No plans for realm spells for A... I mean the Cold Rider though :) His presence on Aebrynis isn't strong enough yet. Priests who worship Awnsheghlien (The Serpent etc) cannot cast realm spells.

Not all of the spells I've listed above will necessarily make it into the final list. Animal Horde is one that is looking fairly shakey at the moment (so much so, that I've stopped working on it for now). It is too similar to Summon Nature's Army...

tcharazazel
04-26-2004, 10:01 AM
Very cool, even better that I first thought :) Thank you for posting the info.

I hope the realm spells for the other gods getts accepted as its rather fitting for them to be included in with the others for the realm spells.

Also, maybe some elf only arcane realm spells? just a thought

One final thing, will these be the only realm spells available, or will you include a methodology to follow to create a realm spell? Like requiring gp, exp, the ability to cast the spell ect. Incase people come up with some other ideas for spells.

irdeggman
04-26-2004, 10:03 AM
Nesirie's blessing - I would instead have the spell affect those vessels that are in port at the time of casting. Otherwise the spell affects all vessels regardless of where they are. IMO realm spells should affect only those holdings/provinces that have some connection at the time of casting, e.g., adjacent provinces, sources/provinces connected via leylines, perhaps guilds connected via trade route (but this one could be considered a stretch).

Hence I guess that target is something that needs to be included. It is either a single province/holding or multiples ones and the number should be limited in some manner (either by caster level or requisite holding level (e.g., source level or temple level).

Realm spells while they are supposed to be more powerful than any normal spell are still limited in their effectivness - the caster is still not a deity, only touched by one.

Another thing, I would not include an automatic knowing of realm spells per level. The original BRCS proposal that made a parrallel to how epic spells worked is still (for learning), IMO, a pretty good basis for learning Realm Spells. Even sorcerers and clerics had to learn epic spells.

If one looks at it, a Realm Spell is on the order of an epic spell but the caster doesn't have to be epic level in order to learn/cast it. This is a pretty good similarity to keep in mind.

Raesene Andu
04-26-2004, 10:25 AM
Originally posted by tcharazazel@Apr 26 2004, 07:31 PM
Also, maybe some elf only arcane realm spells? just a thought

One final thing, will these be the only realm spells available, or will you include a methodology to follow to create a realm spell? Like requiring gp, exp, the ability to cast the spell ect. Incase people come up with some other ideas for spells.
I have a few elf only realm spells I could consider, but I'm unlikely to include them for various reasons.

I'd certainly like to include at least 1 realm spell for each god, including the goblin and non-human gods. Dwarven definitely, the only Goblin realm spell I ever came up with was one to summon an avatar of their god (a gigantic wolf) that I used in one of my pbem games. It didn't require GB or RP though, just sacrifices.

The only spell I'll make available only to priest of the Cold Rider and Azrai is Legion of Dead. Wizards can still cast it, but for various reason I don't think it fits any of the other gods. The other gods do get some cool realm spells, especially Eloele. In general, I'm trying to design the spells to suit each of the god's ethos. In remains to be seen if I am successful or not....

Oh, and I do plan to include some guidelines for designing new realm spells in the chapter. Haven't started on that part though.

Here's another one to discuss.

Avaniís Reason
(Enchantment)

Caster Level: Divine [Avani] 7
Gold: 2 GB
Regency: 3 RP/province level
Duration: 3 months
Required Holding: Temple 4

In the light of Avaniís reason warriors will sheath their swords and the shadow will be driven from the heart and minds of her followers. With this spell clerics of Avani can temporarily bring peace and stability to a single province, preventing any aggressive actions or thoughts for its duration.
A province protected by this spell is unable to be attacked or suffer from any aggressive domain actions such as contest holding, agitate (when used against the regent), and espionage. These actions will all fail when used in a province protected by Avaniís Reason. In addition any diplomacy action seeking a treaty between two nations or individuals will always result in a success if the meeting takes place in the affected province.
Individuals or regents in the province may attempt to escape its effects by making a successful will save each time they attempt an activity motived by aggression.

Raesene Andu
04-26-2004, 10:48 AM
Nesirie's blessing - I would instead have the spell affect those vessels that are in port at the time of casting. Otherwise the spell affects all vessels regardless of where they are. IMO realm spells should affect only those holdings/provinces that have some connection at the time of casting, e.g., adjacent provinces, sources/provinces connected via leylines, perhaps guilds connected via trade route (but this one could be considered a stretch).

I has assumed that was what the spell did :) Guess I do need to spell it out a little better. The affected vessels to have to be in the same province as the spell when it is cast, although they can more later. I wanted to make it a bit like the spells that affect units, but just for ships.

I agree 100% that realm spells can only affect provinces/holdings/units that have a connection with the holding used to power the spell. It wouldn't make sense if someone could just fire them off anywhere.



Hence I guess that target is something that needs to be included. It is either a single province/holding or multiples ones and the number should be limited in some manner (either by caster level or requisite holding level (e.g., source level or temple level).

I've added this to the bottom of the description...

'This spell can only affect vessels that are docked in the province where it is cast and the caster may bless a maximum of 1 vessel/level.'

This brings it into line with the Battle Bless and companion spells.

By the way, with the spell descriptions I'm trying to go for 1 paragraph of flavour text, 1-2 of description of effects, then 1-2 or rules info and limitations. I also want to cut back on the size of the info at the start of the description (gold, regency, holding required, etc). Primarily to make it easier to read, but also to move away from linking realm spells to standard spells. I dropped target from the description because there are only 4 different target types for realm spells: provinces, holdings, units, or a regent(s). Normal spells have a miriad of different targets and areas of effect.



Another thing, I would not include an automatic knowing of realm spells per level. The original BRCS proposal that made a parrallel to how epic spells worked is still (for learning), IMO, a pretty good basis for learning Realm Spells. Even sorcerers and clerics had to learn epic spells.

If one looks at it, a Realm Spell is on the order of an epic spell but the caster doesn't have to be epic level in order to learn/cast it. This is a pretty good similarity to keep in mind.

Good point. I was primarily looking to place a limit on the number of known realm spells, especially for sorcerers. Another option I'm tossing about is limited sorcerers to just 9 realms spells, but allowing them to learn them automatically (after spending a domain action to master the spell).

irdeggman
04-26-2004, 11:08 AM
Originally posted by Raesene Andu@Apr 26 2004, 05:48 AM
Another option I'm tossing about is limited sorcerers to just 9 realms spells, but allowing them to learn them automatically (after spending a domain action to master the spell).

If instead you require a feat to learn realm spells then it could work, but again it wouldn't require 'research' to learn them. Also need to keep in mind that clerics/druids don't normally have to 'learn' their spells, similar to sorcerers. So, IMO, all character capable of casting realm spells should be handled the same way in this regard in order to not give an unfair advantage to any one (or more) spellcasting classes.
What does this mean? Learning them automatically after spending a domain action to master them? It seems to me that it is no longer an automatic learning if they have to spend a domain action to master them.

irdeggman
04-26-2004, 11:15 AM
Originally posted by Raesene Andu@Apr 26 2004, 05:48 AM

Hence I guess that target is something that needs to be included. It is either a single province/holding or multiples ones and the number should be limited in some manner (either by caster level or requisite holding level (e.g., source level or temple level).

I've added this to the bottom of the description...

'This spell can only affect vessels that are docked in the province where it is cast and the caster may bless a maximum of 1 vessel/level.'

This brings it into line with the Battle Bless and companion spells.

By the way, with the spell descriptions I'm trying to go for 1 paragraph of flavour text, 1-2 of description of effects, then 1-2 or rules info and limitations. I also want to cut back on the size of the info at the start of the description (gold, regency, holding required, etc). Primarily to make it easier to read, but also to move away from linking realm spells to standard spells. I dropped target from the description because there are only 4 different target types for realm spells: provinces, holdings, units, or a regent(s). Normal spells have a miriad of different targets and areas of effect.

For this very reason it is a good idea to include target in the front matter of the spell. It makes it easier for the user (i.e., player/DM) to find out what the spell affects quickly and then read the actual description to find out the details. Even epic spells wrok this way so there is really a good idea to keep the format similar regardless of the kind of spell (e.g., normal, epic, realm, etc.)

Osprey
04-26-2004, 05:02 PM
I am very interested in seeing the basic design format for realm spells. With such a template visible to all, we then have a solid framework for designing, editing, and revising (completely overhauling if necessary) new and existing realm spells.

My default design pattern has been to assume that realm spells work like province- or unit-scale versions of regular spells (which the BRCS also did). With this sort of simple template available, it would be very easy for players and DM's to create almost any realm spell based on the existing magic system without having to come up with completely original ideas for them, which then require a whole lot of DM judgement as to how to assign power levels and requirements.

Also, there are several good reasons to base realm spells on spell level instead of caster level:
1. Certain feats and class abilities raise caster levels without raising actual levels of spells able to be cast. These characters would then get more powerful realm spells sooner then they might otherwise.
2. Sorcerers get 2nd+ level spells one level later than wizards (at 4th level instead of 3rd). This is a built-in 3.x balancer that represents wizards' abilities to gain more potent spells slightly earlier than sorcerers. I don't see why this shouldn't apply to realm spells as well, as I think the sorcerers' intuitive approach to magic would give them a disadvantage in dealing with the mass-scale complexities of source holdings, ley lines, and realm spells (which are long-term ritual spells, after all - the sort of things that wizards and some clerics thrive on, and sorcerers generally avoid, as they're non-intuitive and extremely formulaic).
3. Spell level has always been the first and most important measure of a spell's capabilities and potential limitations. Caster level is then used to determine spell potency (range, # of targets, # of dice or bonus damage/hp, etc.). Again, I don't see a convincing reason to break away from this general formula, as it adds a great deal of subjective assignment of power, which in turn spawns endless debate in and out of games - something that I as a DM generally prefer to avoid as it tends to make games bog down as players protest or argue with the DM. A clear set of design guidelines helps avoid this problem.

If spell level is used, it also makes it much easier to equate realm spells with normal spells if the normal spells are to be used as any sort of basis for designing realm spells. While it might be more "flavor friendly" to have realm spells being distinct and unique vs. normal spells, it is far less user friendly when designing new realm spells with any sort of clear guidelines. And let's face it, if a spellcasting character designs a new realm spell, wouldn't they base the design on the magic they already understand (their normal spells known)?

I agree with Irdeggman that Realm Spells should all require research, regardless of who is learning them (sorcerers, clerics, and wizards). This makes for one set of rules rather than 3 or more depending on your class, which I think both simplifies things and keeps all realm spell casters (temple and source regents) on more equal (and competitive) footing.


Another major problem, discussed recently in the Royal Library, was how to balance normal ritual spells (esp. if cooperative ritial magic is allowed), Battle Magic (in BRCS, gigantic metamagicked spells that would take 10-15 minutes at most to cast, but require huge amounts of spell components and a unit trained to work with the battle caster...I have issues with that, but oh well), and Realm Spells.

My suggestion is to remove the BRCS version of Battle Magic entirely...in the original BR setting, there were simply unit-based effects for regular area-effect spells, some of which were quite devestating (Cloudkill a particularly vicious unit killer as I recall). Now while that system may need revising (and we're really waiting on a revised Ch. 6 proposal to be able to discuss this in any detail), eliminating or limiting the Battle Magic in a believable, system-compatible way might help distinguish and emphasize the much greater effects of month-long ritual Realm Spells vs. the localized effects of Battle Magic in the field...otherwise all of the unit-affecting Realm Spells like Cure Unit, Battle Bless, and especially Mass Destruction (the most resource-wasting realm spell I've ever seen, given that it only does 1, maybe 2 hits of damage to a few units for massive RP and GB costs) might seem like a real waste of time and resources in comparison...

I would like to see Mass Destruction revised to become a more viable realm spell for those evocation specialists amongst the Source regents. The color-text description of the spell makes it seem incredible, but the actual effects were obviously limited for fear of upsetting game balance and making it too easy for a strong source regent to simply wipe out a good chunk of an invading force.

Here's a possible simplified revision for it, changing the damage and save DC to more realistic levels I think. Also, I raised spell level to 3rd instead of 2nd, as Fireball or Lightning Bolt seem like the most appropriate base spells, and a vicious spell like this shouldn't be available to very low-level source regents anyways.

Mass Destruction
(Evocation)
Spell Level: 3rd (wizard/sorcerer)
Target: up to 1 unit per 3 caster levels
Regency Cost: 10 RP per unit affected
Material Cost: 2 GB per unit affected
Required Holding: Source 5

A massive barrage of fire and lightning rains down from the sky, ripping apart entire companies of a single targeted army or garrison. While the casting time for the spell is standard (1 month), the actual completion may be delayed. The spell may be completed, and its effects unleashed in the province where it was cast, in the last War Move of the month in which it was cast, or in any of the 4 War Moves of the following month. The caster must remain in that province until the spell is completed, and must have line of sight to the target army when completing the spell.

Each unit targeted takes 3 hits of damage, with a successful unit Morale check reducing the damage to 1 hit. The DC for the Morale check is standard (DC 13 + caster's primary ability modifier, plus any modifiers for Spell Focus: Evocation). Thus, even veteran units could be destroyed by this spell, though good discipline and leadership will allow a unit to take cover, disperse, and minimize overall damage to a unit. As usual, fortifications add their level to any morale checks made by garrisoned units within.

**************

Based on existing BRCS army rules, most units with a decent leader (who get morale bonuses based on their Lead skill as well as any Hero Unit morale bonuses) should have no problem making the moral save, suffering only minimal damage. Even veterans without leaders still get a +4 to +8 (veteran infantry, pikes, archers, cavalry w/ Toughness), giving them a reasonably good chance of survival. Units inside fortifications also stand a good chance of avoiding serious damage.

But regular or vets who get caught in the open may very well be destroyed outright...perfectly reasonable given the described effects of the spell.

Also, as acid, cold, force, and sonic damage spells aren't normally available to the same degree of damage and power as fire and lightning at the minimum spell level, I thought it more reasonable to limit the energy types to the basic pair of high-damage 3rd level spell effects.

Osprey

tcharazazel
04-26-2004, 06:35 PM
Well, if you are going to base the realm spells on the epic spell formula will it then cost lots of gp and exp to make them?

However, to just research known realm spells it would just take time then, correct?

Also, would you put in a spellcraft check to cast them then? or just forgo that as the time requirements generally make the spellcraft DC rather low anyway, and if they have more people helpin in the rituals than even lower DC to cast.

kgauck
04-26-2004, 08:10 PM
----- Original Message -----

From: "tcharazazel" <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET>

Sent: Monday, April 26, 2004 1:35 PM





> Well, if you are going to base the realm spells on the epic

> spell formula will it then cost lots of gp and exp to make them?



Realm Spells traditionally cost lots of gp (in terms of GB) and RP (which

many exchange for xp in magical costs), so that cost should naturally remain

in its BR format.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

irdeggman
04-26-2004, 08:17 PM
As far as making realm spells similar to epic spells I was only referring to the &#39;learning process&#39;, which I though I had made clear when I was refering to not knowing any automatically.

Since they take a domain turn to cast (or most of one anyway) the knowledge checks required to cast epic spells doesn&#39;t readily translate, so the casting should be pretty much automatic once the RP and GB costs are met.

Athos69
04-26-2004, 08:26 PM
Posting for comment and potential inclusion:

Summon Earthís Army
(Conjuration)
Caster Level: Divine [Moradin] 5.
Target: up to 1 unit/4 levels
Duration: 4 weeks + 1 week/level (D)
Saving Throw: None
Spell Resistance: No
Regency Cost: 5 RP/unit.
Material Components: 3 GB/unit worth of expendable ritual components and payment to the summoned creatures.
Special Requirements: Temple (3), Karamhul caster only, Mountain or Hill terrain

By calling upon Moradin, Karamhul Clerics may call forth the power of the Elemental Plane of Earth. This spell summons a mixture of Earth Elementals of Medium and Large sizes, Walking Walls, Stonechildren and Xorn to serve the caster faithfully until either dismissed or the spell duration ends.
Units summoned by this realm spell cannot leave mountainous or hill terrain. A province can muster a maximum number of units equal to the total of the unclaimed source levels and the temple level.


Unit Type: Earth Army
Mv: 1
Melee: +10
Mis: --
Chg: +8
Def: 16
Hits: 4
Morale: +6

tcharazazel
04-26-2004, 08:29 PM
heheh, yeah of course, however, that is to Cast the spell not to Make it.

To research a realm spell it currently only requires 1gb per month spent researching and them to make a spellcraft DC + spell level. And I think thats fine as long as they are just Researching a Known spell, and not actually Making a new realm spell.

Making Epic Spell: gp cpst = 9000 gp x ending spellcraft DC with the exp cost = 1/25 of the total cost. So yeah, as the spellcraft DC is gonna be rather low for most of the realm spells there is not much of a need to give them an exp cost, though maybe an RP cost then? heh, just a thought.

Well, in the BCRS technically 1 blood point = 1000 exp, as this really favors those casters with low bloodlines cause its much easier for them to get back up. My DM made the rule that you get when burning 1 bloodpoint 100 exp x the amount of RP you would get for burning 1 bloodpoint. While Officially 1 RP = 10 exp. So, not really spending that much in terms of exp for most spells, as in epic terms it takes 100 exp to count as -1 to Spellcraft DC to cast the spell. Heheh, so as most spells dont require burning 10 RP minimum they would only really be using the increased time factor to lower the DCs of the spells.

And yes I know that Casting the spells are to be similar tho not the same as the epic spell creation and casting process, however, it is an exsisting system that offers a decent starting point to figure out what the costs should be. Heh, instead of just arbitrarily picking so much GB and so much RP to spend for the spell.

As Raesene is planning on offering a methodology to create new spells, I just was curious if he wanted to base the system for making realm spells more on the epic system of spell creation.

tcharazazel
04-26-2004, 09:04 PM
btw cool variant just one recomendation, just put the description and the unit description last. In other words, move up the regency cost and material costs with the rest of the bold faced spell info.

irdeggman
04-26-2004, 09:18 PM
Originally posted by tcharazazel@Apr 26 2004, 03:29 PM
Well, in the BCRS technically 1 blood point = 1000 exp, as this really favors those casters with low bloodlines cause its much easier for them to get back up. My DM made the rule that you get when burning 1 bloodpoint 100 exp x the amount of RP you would get for burning 1 bloodpoint. While Officially 1 RP = 10 exp. So, not really spending that much in terms of exp for most spells, as in epic terms it takes 100 exp to count as -1 to Spellcraft DC to cast the spell. Heheh, so as most spells dont require burning 10 RP minimum they would only really be using the increased time factor to lower the DCs of the spells.

And yes I know that Casting the spells are to be similar tho not the same as the epic spell creation and casting process, however, it is an exsisting system that offers a decent starting point to figure out what the costs should be. Heh, instead of just arbitrarily picking so much GB and so much RP to spend for the spell.

As Raesene is planning on offering a methodology to create new spells, I just was curious if he wanted to base the system for making realm spells more on the epic system of spell creation.
Hmm the 1 RP equals 100 xp was to be removed from the magic chapter. I had commented on that awhile back. In Chap 8, the chapter covering creating magic items is specifies that this should be 1 blood point (not RP) per 1000 xp (and only once per item or spell). This was based on the ability (3-18) based range for blood scores though, so when revised the exp benefit should roughly be halved to 500 xp per blood point of blood score. I had talked about how essentially gaining RP is like collecting interest on something, it doesn&#39;t really &#39;cost&#39; the regent anything personally. Creating magic items is supposed to require some sort of personal sacrifice to make, hence the exp cost.

The cost of Realm Spells was actually based on the 2nd ed costs for them, so it really isn&#39;t all that arbitrary, unless you assume that is was when TSR created the setting originally. The problem with using the epic rules too much is that the spells don&#39;t quite work the same way, for one there are no epic spells that take as long to cast as do realm spells.

Osprey
04-26-2004, 09:42 PM
My DM made the rule that you get when burning 1 bloodpoint 100 exp x the amount of RP you would get for burning 1 bloodpoint.

Actually, I made it 100 xp x current Bloodline score [BRCS-level bloodline (ability) scores]. So by expending a permanent point of Bloodline score at say 27, the item creator would get 2700 xp for making a magic item. This xp is usable only for a single item...any excess xp are lost.

Osprey
04-26-2004, 09:53 PM
Here&#39;s the realm spell learning system I&#39;ve adopted for my own BR campaign.

The Spellcraft DC to learn a Realm Spell is DC 15 + 2 per level of the realm spell being researched (so DC 17 through 33 for level 1-9 spells). I also integrated Raesene&#39;s suggestion a while back of lowering the research time to 1 week per level, though it still costs 1 GB per level of the spell (=1 GB per week of realm spell research). I found this to be more in proportion to the costs and times required for regular spells vs. realm spells. Failure on the spellcraft check means the money and time is spent, but the spell is not mastered. The researcher may not again attempt to learn the realm spell until he or she has gained a new spellcaster level (appropriate to the spell being learned, of course).

tcharazazel
04-26-2004, 10:07 PM
actually, you can increase the time for epic spells thats where i was getting the reason for the lower spellcraft DC. every 1 min up to 10 min = -2 DC. Every 1 day up to 100 days = -2 DC. This is on pages 88-92 in the Epic book.

So, if you have a spell require 32 days to cast, then it would have a -20 DC (for the first 10 min) and -64 DC for it requiring 32 days so a total of -84 DC to the spell craft check. Heheh, if you add in that others are helping...

The basic formula = 2 x spell slot level - 1. So it starts at for a 1st level slot -1 DC and it goes to -3 for 2nd level -5 for 3rd level ect.

Lets say 3 other spell casters (doesnt matter if theyre are divine or arcane) all throw in a 3rd level spell slot (either give up a spell or use an empty slot). Thats -5 DC per spell caster so a total of -15 to the spellcraft DC.

Thus far we got -99 DC to the spellcraft check... heheh

So how hard would it be to cast the spell :) depends on how powerful you would want to consider it really. If were considering a realm spell meant to affect a whole province... thats an area of what? roughly 30-50 square miles? so for ease lets say 40 square miles, or 115135952 ft^2. The DC to increase a spells radius by 100% is +4. So if we have a spell with a radius of 40&#39; that would require... woah damn... oh about... hmm... not so easy to calculate as it grows rather fast... so it requires increasing the spell radius 22 times to get it to 167772160 ft^2 close enough really. so that means 22 x 4 = +88 to the spell craft DC. so now were at -11 DC for the spellcraft check.

EDIT: ok so fora province with 1000 square miles that would be 27878398812 ft^2. So it would take 29-30 (30 to go over it, 29 is just about 6 billion ft^2 shy.) multiples to cover it. Thus making the DC 116-120. (So to redo what was said, it would make the DC 49 for a specialist and DC 54 for a non specialist.)

if we increase the duration also, so the spell lasts for a month, instead of 1 min, then that would also increase the DC by +2 DC per 100% increase so... 46080 min in a 32 day month, and it requires 16 increases to get the spell to 65536 min so thats 16 x 2 = +32 to the spellcraft DC. So now were at a 22 DC spellcraft check.

If this spell is in the specialist school then tey would get a -5 to the DC so they would have a DC of 17. Heheh now that doesnt seem so tough.

It would also give the spell creation a cost of 9000 gp x 17 DC = 153000 gp and an exp cost of 6120.

This is just a basic example. the caster could always increase the casting time or the number of people helpin to cast the spell to further lower the DC, however, it should always have a Base cost probably just left at DC 10 so it would cost 9000 gp x 10 = 90000 gp and an exp cost of 3600 exp no matter how low they put the spell craft DC. Heheh, however, this would only be for creating an unknown realm spell.

For researching a known realm spell, keepin the exsisting system seems fine with me.

Finally, I noticed that the system is based on the 2ndE version... well thats good to know however, lots of things hav changed in the conversion of magic to the 3/3.5E.
So wouldnt it make sense to "update" the way the spell costs were determined also? Heh, were not talkin exact science here, just approximations of course, as we all have lives to lead :)

EDIT: What I was proposing here was only for in charadter creation of realm spells, not for creation of spells out of character. So, if a DM wants to make a spell for a certain character thats appropriate for him, you wouldnt use the method I&#39;m proposing.

RaspK_FOG
04-26-2004, 10:14 PM
Some very good stuff I see... B)

Raesene Andu
04-26-2004, 10:29 PM
Here a quick idea for creating realm spell for you to discuss. I have to go to work now, but I&#39;ll get back to finishing this later :)


Creating Realm Spells

Level:
As normal spell

Gold/Regency:
Level 1-2: 1
Level 3-4: 2
Level 5-6: 4
Level 7-8: 8
Level 9-10: 10

Target Modifiers
Multiple targets: x0.5
Entire Province: x0.5
Holding: x1.0
Unit: x1.5
Ley Line: x1.5
Individual: x2.0
Target is willing: x0.5
Target is enemy: x2.0

Duration/Effect Modifiers
Instantaneous: x0.5
1 week+: x0.5
3 months: x1.0
Longer than 3 months: x1.5
Permanent1: x2.0

Gold Cost Modifiers
Material component < 500 gp x1.0
Material component 500-2000 gp x1.5
Material component > 2000gp x2.0

Regency Cost Modifiers
Multiple targets, single GB cost2 x2.0

1 Spells whose effects are permanent (such as mass destruction and raze) are considered permanent for the purposes of determining RP and GB cost.

2 When designing a spell that affects multiple targets, you may choose to have a single base GB cost, but increase the RP cost/target.

Raesene Andu
04-26-2004, 10:37 PM
By the way, all the modifiers are to cost, the forums screw up the formatting, or this would be easier to see.

Green Knight
04-26-2004, 10:50 PM
A province is about 1000 square miles.



-----Original Message-----

From: Birthright Roleplaying Game Discussion

[mailto:BIRTHRIGHT-L@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM] On Behalf Of tcharazazel

Sent: 27. april 2004 00:08

To: BIRTHRIGHT-L@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM

Subject: Re: Chapter 7 Revision [36#2507]



This post was generated by the Birthright.net message forum.

You can view the entire thread at:

http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=36&t=2507



tcharazazel wrote:

actually, you can increase the time for epic spells thats where i was

getting the reason for the lower spellcraft DC. every 1 min up to 10 min

= -2 DC. Every 1 day up to 100 days = -2 DC. This is on pages 88-92 in

the Epic book.



So, if you have a spell require 32 days to cast, then it would have a

-20 DC (for the first 10 min) and -64 DC for it requiring 32 days so a

total of -84 DC to the spell craft check. Heheh, if you add in that

others are helping...



The basic formula = 2 x spell slot level - 1. So it starts at for a 1st

level slot -1 DC and it goes to -3 for 2nd level -5 for 3rd level ect.



Lets say 3 other spell casters (doesnt matter if theyre are divine or

arcane) all throw in a 3rd level spell slot (either give up a spell or

use an empty slot). Thats -5 DC per spell caster so a total of -15 to

the spellcraft DC.



Thus far we got -99 DC to the spellcraft check... heheh



So how hard would it be to cast the spell :) depends on how powerful

you would want to consider it really. If were considering a realm spell

meant to affect a whole province... thats an area of what? roughly 30-50

square miles? so for ease lets say 40 square miles, or 115135952 ft^2.

The DC to increase a spells radius by 100% is +4. So if we have a spell

with a radius of 40` that would require... woah damn... oh about...

hmm... not so easy to calculate as it grows rather fast... so it

requires increasing the spell radius 22 times to get it to 167772160

ft^2 close enough really. so that means 22 x 4 = +88 to the spell craft

DC. so now were at -11 DC for the spellcraft check.



if we increase teh duration also, so the spell lasts for a month,

instead of 1 min, then that would also increase the DC by +2 DC per 100%

increase so... 46080 min in a 32 day month, and it requires 16 increases

to get the spell to 65536 min so thats 16 x 2 = +32 to the spellcraft

DC. So now were at a 22 DC spellcraft check.



If this spell is in the specialist school then tey would get a -5 to

the DC so they would have a DC of 17. Heheh now that doesnt seem so

tough.



It would also give the spell creation a cost of 9000 gp x 17 DC =

153000 gp and an exp cost of 6120.



This is just a basic example. the caster could always increase the

casting time or the number of people helpin to cast the spell to further

lower the DC, however, it should always have a Base cost probably just

left at DC 10 so it would cost 9000 gp x 10 = 90000 gp and an exp cost

of 3600 exp no matter how low they put the spell craft DC. Heheh,

however, this would only be for creating an unknown realm spell.



For researching a known realm spell, keepin the exsisting system seems

fine with me.



Finally, I noticed that the system is based on the 2ndE version... well

thats good to know however, lots of things hav changed in the conversion

of magic to the 3/3.5E.

So wouldnt it make sense to "update" the way the spell costs

were determined also? Heh, were not talkin exact science here, just

approximations of course, as we all have lives to lead :)



************************************************** **********************

****



Birthright-l Archives:

http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html

Don E
04-26-2004, 10:54 PM
Originally posted by Raesene Andu@Apr 25 2004, 01:26 PM
- More of the info from Book of Magecraft on sources and leylines, + EXAMPLES&#33;&#33;
- New realm spells (I&#39;ll post info on these before finalising the revision)
- Random tables for determining NPC or PC realm spells known OR, at the very least a list of all the spells before their descriptions. Very useful as anyone who is looking up spells for their spellcaster knows.
- Expanding the info on magic potential to include info on restoring magic potential and so forth.

Personally I am all for making new realm spells, and have written a number myself. That said I must admit to some curiosity as to what happened to the plan to limit the BRCS to a conversion of 2e BR and to not include any house rules. Aren&#39;t new spells just one of the classic examples of house rules commonly incorporated in most campaigns, and one who often shows the greatest degree of variation fbetween individual campaigns?

The suggestion of limiting house rules to BR.net has come up in other threads, and I think new spells (and magic items, NPCs, monsters etc.) are better of submitted to the site than to try gain some form of consensus on what spells to include and not. Where will the line be drawn? Can anybody have their spells included, will there be a poll for every single new spell, or will somebody simply decide what spells get included and not?

Personally I think what is mostly needed is more information on sources and ley lines. In particular the interaction between sources, armies, mundane actions etc. should be discussed and clarified.

Cheers,
E

Raesene Andu
04-26-2004, 11:23 PM
That was the old BRCS :) That was pretty much just a straight conversion of the 2E material, no major additions.

I think the new version needs to add a little more material, and if that material has to come from house rules, then so be it.

A lot of the material I&#39;m adding to this chapter however is just BoM stuff that was left out of the original BRCS that I think should be in there. As for the new spells, most are divine spells, especially those specific to one particular god. Some are spells originally left out of the BRCS for various reasons that were in the original material.

As for everyone getting their spells included, sure, I have no problem with that, the more the merrier. Post them here and if I think they&#39;re suitable for the BRCS, then in they go. We&#39;ll go with the format that Osprey suggested (so you need level, gold & regency cost, target, duration, and required holding).

tcharazazel
04-27-2004, 01:26 AM
so using your system then Raesene:

a level 1-2 spell would have a base cost of 1 Gold/RP x 0.5 to affect the entire province x 0.5 for instantaneous effect x 1.0 for costing <500 gp...

I&#39;m not sure I&#39;m getting that right... as it would be something like .25 Gold/RP... hmm, would you please give an example so I get it right? Thanks

Raesene Andu
04-27-2004, 02:37 AM
Rounded up, so a minimum cost of 1 GB, 1 RP...

Note: I&#39;ve only just started work on the system, that was the best I could come up with for about 15-20mins work. I haven&#39;t even tried to convert any spells yet, but do that tonight to see how the system works and make adjustments then.

tcharazazel
04-27-2004, 03:20 AM
ok cool :)

irdeggman
04-27-2004, 09:35 AM
Originally posted by Raesene Andu@Apr 26 2004, 05:29 PM
Target Modifiers
Multiple targets: x0.5
Entire Province: x0.5
Holding: x1.0
Unit: x1.5
Ley Line: x1.5
Individual: x2.0
Target is willing: x0.5
Target is enemy: x2.0

Multipliers seem to be off.

For example it is only X 0.5 for multiple targets while it is X 1.0 for a single target.

Same with a single holding versus an entire province.

irdeggman
04-27-2004, 09:43 AM
Originally posted by Raesene Andu@Apr 26 2004, 06:23 PM
That was the old BRCS :) That was pretty much just a straight conversion of the 2E material, no major additions.

I think the new version needs to add a little more material, and if that material has to come from house rules, then so be it.

A lot of the material I&#39;m adding to this chapter however is just BoM stuff that was left out of the original BRCS that I think should be in there. As for the new spells, most are divine spells, especially those specific to one particular god. Some are spells originally left out of the BRCS for various reasons that were in the original material.

As for everyone getting their spells included, sure, I have no problem with that, the more the merrier. Post them here and if I think they&#39;re suitable for the BRCS, then in they go. We&#39;ll go with the format that Osprey suggested (so you need level, gold & regency cost, target, duration, and required holding).
Don E is actually correct. The BRCS itself should more limited.

What is a good idea is to include some examples of created spells after the &#39;formula&#39; for research. The rest belong in the Royal Library as options for the everyone. Otherwise the BRCS will end up being 500+ pages after everyone gets their own spells inserted. People have already commented on the limited download capability that some they have and larger documents just serve to make it more difficult so that needs to be kept in mind.

It is probably a good idea to include a single unique spell for each deity, which by their inclusion can serve as a pattern/example to grow on. This could serve as the replacement for the &#39;quest&#39; spells from the Book of Priestcraft, which don&#39;t really exist in 3.5 and were incomplete and unbalanced in the BoP.

irdeggman
04-27-2004, 09:55 AM
Originally posted by tcharazazel@Apr 26 2004, 03:29 PM

To research a realm spell it currently only requires 1gb per month spent researching and them to make a spellcraft DC + spell level. And I think thats fine as long as they are just Researching a Known spell, and not actually Making a new realm spell.

Actually the cost of researching any spell is the same in 3.5. So that pattern should be maintained. Also the point of having to research (i.e., learn) each realm spell makes it a point that they are extremely rare. Far fewer casters capable of casting realm magic than true magic after all ;) hence they are not &#39;known&#39;. "Known&#39; implies the same familiarity that allows a wizard to pick 2 new spells when he gains levels.

Osprey
04-27-2004, 03:10 PM
Another proposed modification:

Shouldn&#39;t Summon Monstrous Unit be available to clerics as well as source regents, as both types cast the identical base spell at the same spell levels, Summon Monster (I-IX)?

In my campaign, I simply called it Summon Divine Legions, but its mechanics are pretty much identical to Summon Monstrous Unit, which in the BRCS already states that the creatures summoned are appropriate to the caster&#39;s alignment and inclination. To me that pretty much means look at the 3.5 Summon Monster spell and choose appropriate types from the lists (at max. Summon Monster level minus 1, as Summon Monstrous Unit is a level 2 realm spell, so I&#39;d say it acts a realm-scale Summon Monster II, summoning multiple creatures from the SM I list).

The only difference I&#39;d suggest is to raise the Temple requirement to Temple (5), as summoning an entire host of a deity&#39;s servants and warriors should require some serious clout with one&#39;s deity. In general, I think the existing SMU realm spell is extremely powerful...if it were up to me, I&#39;d make it a level 3+ realm spell, and raise the Source requirement to (5) for source regents. Though I know this is at odds with the 2e original...

Raesene Andu
04-28-2004, 01:32 AM
Originally posted by irdeggman@Apr 27 2004, 07:05 PM
Multipliers seem to be off.

For example it is only X 0.5 for multiple targets while it is X 1.0 for a single target.

Same with a single holding versus an entire province.
As I mention I haven&#39;t finished the system, but the theory is that with multiple targets you pay a GB and RP cost for each target. So for each province or unit that the spell affects you need to pay the cost, this is why it has a x0.5 multiplyer. (I&#39;m trying to match up the system with the current spells so they get close to fitting).

And it stands to reason that targetting something like a realm spell on a single group of people or an individual is a lot more difficult than a whole province.

tcharazazel
04-28-2004, 03:05 AM
um irdeggman, what part didnt you understand of the quote?

cause im not following what the comment was about...

Heh, it doesnt matter either really, as were past it now.

Ok, cool Raesene so to redo that example again... this time with one unit and for multiple targets

for a lvl 3 spell 2 GB/RP x 1.5 for one unit x 2.0 for being the enemy x 0.5 for instanteous x 0.5 for <500 gp material costs

so that would be 1.5 GB and RP to make... hmm that seems rather low to make a spell similar to destruction... though how would you add in the increased # of units per level? Or would you only be able to make a spell with a fixed number of targets then?

cause you could make the spell affect 6 units tho it would cost an extra x 3 gb/rp to do so...

for a lvl 3 spell 2 GB/RP x 1.5 for one unit x 6 x 0.5 for 6 targets x 2.0 for being the enemy x 0.5 for instanteous x 0.5 for <500 gp material costs = 4.5 gb/rp

hmm... heh, to hit 6 units with a realm spell version of fireball while the normal mass destruction costs 10rp/unit and 5 gb...

Also Im not sure what the increased material costs are included for or how they are really calculated unless your just using the component cost from the base spell.

Would also recomend including some mitigating factors, like those in the epic book, ie lower costs by increasing the number of casters required, or the time to cast the spell, ect.

Raesene Andu
04-28-2004, 05:21 AM
Originally posted by tcharazazel@Apr 28 2004, 12:35 PM
For a lvl 3 spell 2 GB/RP x 1.5 for one unit x 2.0 for being the enemy x 0.5 for instanteous x 0.5 for <500 gp material costs

so that would be 1.5 GB and RP to make... hmm that seems rather low to make a spell similar to destruction... though how would you add in the increased # of units per level? Or would you only be able to make a spell with a fixed number of targets then?
Ok, using your example, the amounts are rounded up, so it would be 2 GB and 2 RP for 1 unit. Now, you have it as Instantaneous, looking at the Mass Destruction realm spell, it isn&#39;t exactly instantaneous, you can delay the effects for a while. Also Mass Destruction also unleshes mutiple forms of energy on its victims.

When designing a realm spell you also need to design the spell for just 1 target to start with and then use the cost of that spell as the cost/target. So something that costs 2 GB and 2 RP to destroy 1 unit, would cost 12 GB and 12 RP to destroy 6 units... if you see what I&#39;m getting at. That compares a little closer to Mass Destruction, in that it has a much higher GB cost, but a reduced RP cost...

And... if you were to go with a similar system to Mass destruction, where the spell&#39;s effects are delayed for up to a week or so, then the cost for destroying 1 unit rises to 3GB and 3 RP, and the cost for destroying 6 units rises to 15 GB and 15 RP, compared to 5 GB and 60 RP for the original version of mass destruction.

The modifiers for material costs are a bit dodgy, I just tossed that in there at the last minute to try and adjust for spell that had really high components costs in their standard versions.

This is not something that is easy to design a system for, not easy at all. The one I posted took me roughly 20 minutes to design, but I haven&#39;t managed to come up with something better since :)

tcharazazel
04-28-2004, 07:01 AM
ok cool.

Yeah, so if you have a spell like mass destruction then, it would have something like fireball and lightning so when combining base spells into a realm spell of the same and of different spell level how would you include that in the calculations? just multipy them in? so for the mass destruction with fireball and lightning

2 x 2 (for both spells) x 1.5 for one unit x 2.0 for enemy x 0.5 for instant x 0.5 for material costs <500gp = 3gb/rp

heheh, now what about adding metamagic to the spells and thus increasing the spell level of the spell. ie if you use maximized fireball and lightning the spell level would be 6 lvl. So the cost would be for both in the spell:

4 x 4 x 1.5 x 2 x .5 x .5 = 12gb/rp

or just 3 gb/rp if its only fireball or lightning instead of both in the spell.

honestly, i wasnt too sure about the delay 1 week... as it says x 0.5 for 1 week+ for duration and for 3 months its x 1.0. Though why would an instantaneous type of spell like a fireball be classified as permanent tho really when you said that it has a delay as a delay doesnt = permanent because the spell effect is still instantaneous

normally for permanent effects its a beneficial spell like see invisible or on a realm spell scale bless lands... heheh

So to bless lands permanently it would cost per province:

1 for spell level x 0.5 for entire province x 2.0 for permanent x 0.5 for <500gp = .5 gb/rp rounded up 1gp/rp per province to effectively add +1 to the province level and temple level permanently... wow thats dirt cheap... hmm... well its prob cause im not sure what spell would be appropriate to use, i just guessed bless... tho if something like a level 3-4 spell used then it would still just be 1gb/rp. Why would anybody bother to cast the old version of it every season when permancy costs the same?

or if you put in protection from magic using greater dispel magic as the base spell:

3 x 0.5 x 2 x 0.5 = 1.5 gb/rp rounded up to 2 gb/rp per province heh, thats another awesome thing to get permanently for so little...

Anyway, to make sure that I got your basic idea then: The realm spells are now more based upon ritual(s), hence the higher GB costs, and less on exp cost/divine power, hence lower RP. And that also seems to go along with the lower RP availablity of the new Ch 2 version. Heheh, money is gonna make the world go round :)

Raesene Andu
04-28-2004, 07:56 AM
By permantent spells I meant ones like Alchemy, etc, whose effects are permanent. This would primarily be creation spells, I don&#39;t think many others would qualify...

I&#39;m just heading home from work now. I&#39;ll take a look through what&#39;s I&#39;ve come up with so far and see if I can&#39;t post an updated version later. I&#39;ll have to run through a few examples and then see how they work and make changes based on the results of those examples.

tcharazazel
04-28-2004, 08:13 AM
cool :) thnx

irdeggman
04-28-2004, 09:49 AM
Originally posted by tcharazazel@Apr 28 2004, 02:01 AM
heheh, now what about adding metamagic to the spells and thus increasing the spell level of the spell. ie if you use maximized fireball and lightning the spell level would be 6 lvl. So the cost would be for both in the spell:

I would not allow the metamagic feats in the PHB to apply to Realm Spells. They are different beasts in this regards. Remember that almost all metamagic feats require usage of a spell slot of higher level than the one being meta&#39;d. Now this doesn&#39;t really translate for Realm Spells, since there is no spells per day type of concept for them. Basically a spellcaster can only cast 1 realm spell per domain action anyway.

irdeggman
04-28-2004, 09:58 AM
Originally posted by tcharazazel@Apr 27 2004, 10:05 PM
um irdeggman, what part didnt you understand of the quote?

cause im not following what the comment was about...

I&#39;m not sure which post of mine you are referring to.

I am assuming it is the one about different costs for researching spells that are known versus researching new spells. That was how I read your original post that there should be 2 different costs to research a spell, one for the &#39;standard&#39; realm spells (i.e., those to be listed in the BRCS) and one for any new spells researched (new ones or variations of other spells that the character creates.).

This is what I was refering to. There are not 2 separate sets of costs to research a spell in 3.5. There is only one set or formula to be used regardless if it is a spell listed in the BRCS or not. The costing formulas that Ian has been working on and proposing make no distinction between a spell listed in the BRCS, something totally new or creating a variation of an already known spell.

Don E
04-28-2004, 10:24 AM
Originally posted by Raesene Andu@Apr 28 2004, 08:56 AM
By permantent spells I meant ones like Alchemy, etc, whose effects are permanent. This would primarily be creation spells, I don&#39;t think many others would qualify...

In this case I think it would be prudent to go with a deffinition of permanent closer to the one already established in the core rules. A permanent spell in 3e can be detected and dispelled after it has been cast, as opposed to instantaneous spells. To my knowledge the alchemy spell creates true gold/valuables that cannot be discerned from the mundane equivalent and cannot be dispelled.

Cheers
E

Raesene Andu
04-28-2004, 01:02 PM
Unfortunately there appears to be no easy way to come up with a system to divine the method used to set GB and RP costs in 2nd edition, most likely because there is not system, each spell has been individually balanced.

So creating a system that fits all the old realm spells and explains how to work out their GB and RP costs is impossible as far as I can tell. That leaves you with a choice.
1. Either drop the idea of providing guidelines for designing new realm spells.
2. Provide very vague guidelines and suggest DM sets GB and RP cost.
3. Provide a detailed set of guidelines that are to be used just for designing new spells and ignore the irregularities in the old spells.
4. Provide a detailed set of guidelines and rebalance the old spells to suit.

The system I posted can give you some very rough guidelines, but is by no mean a good system, just a rough example of something that can be done. It is very difficult to put across what is a very complex way of choosing how a realm spell act in just a few simple rules.

Here&#39;s an example spell I&#39;ve designed using a slighly modified version of the design rules I posted.

Cure Plague
(Conjuration)

Spell Level: Divine 6
Gold: 2 GB
Regency: 4 RP/province
Target: up to 1 province/3 levels
Duration: Instantaneous
Required Holding: Temple 1

The ability of clerics to heal the sick is widely known, but this spell goes further. With his godís assistance, the cleric can cure an entire province of a particular plague or disease. The spell cures all common diseases and infections affecting people living within the province. It also puts a halt the spread of magical diseases, including those caused by realm magic, such as death plague, although it does not cure those already infected. This spell can only be cast in a province where the cleric has a temple.

Now I began with the Heal spell, which is level 6, so 4 GB & 4 RP to cast. It is going to effect an entire province, but its effect&#39;s are targets on individuals (in this case plague victims). So those to modifers cancel each other out, so it remains 4 GB & 4 RP to cast. It can effect mutiple provinces, so the cost becomes 2 GB & 2 RP/province. However, I want the spell to have a single GB cost, so using the modified design rules that now becomes 2 GB + (4 RP/province).

Looking at another example, a realm spell called Dominate Province. It is based on the Dominate Monster spell, so it is level 9, or 10 GB and 10 RP to start with. It can effect only 1 province, so that becomes 5 GB, 5 RP. It last for 3 months, so that then becomes 7.5 GB & RP. I want to reduce the GB cost, so that becomes 3.75 GB + 15 RP. It requires a cost per level of province, so that becomes 3.75 GB + 7.5 RP. Rounding up, that then becomes 4 GB + 8 RP/level of province for a spell that allows you to completely dominate a province. If I wanted just a single GB cost, then it would become 4 GB + (16 RP / level of province)

Are these examples balanced? Looking at my original spell note for these two, the costs come out similar. The Cure Plague one is cheaper than the original, the Dominate province one is more expensive, but both are close. In both cases, I went back to the original spell and worked up from there, ending up with results similar to what I had just decided on when originally designing the spells.

Anyway, here is the modified version of the design system, try a few examples and let me know how it turns out. If you think it is worth exploring further, then I shall, otherwise I&#39;ll drop the whole idea and go back to balancing each spell individually.

Creating Realm Spells

Level:
As normal spell

Gold/Regency:
Level 1-2: 1
Level 3-4: 2
Level 5-6: 4
Level 7-8: 8
Level 9: 10

Target Modifiers
Multiple targets: x0.5
Entire Province: x0.5
Holding/Structure: x1.0
Unit: x1.5
Ley Line: x1.5
Individual: x2.0
Target is willing: x0.5
Target is enemy: x2.0

Duration/Effect Modifiers
Instantaneous: x0.5
Less than 1 month: x1.0
1-3 months: x1.5
Longer than 3 months: x2.0
Longer than 6 months: x3.0

Gold Cost Modifiers
Material component < 500 gp x1.0
Material component 500-2000 gp x1.5
Material component > 2000gp x2.0
Reduce Spells Level by 1 x2.0

Regency Cost Modifiers
Reduce Spellís Level by 1 x2.0
Per level (province/holding): x0.5
Multiple targets, single GB cost* x2.0
Reduce GB cost by 0.5 x2.0

* When designing a spell that affects multiple targets, you may choose to have a single base GB cost, but increase the RP cost/target.

Osprey
04-28-2004, 03:21 PM
This looks better at first glance, will need some time to test it, my only comment is: if anything like this gets introduced into the published version, man do I hope there is some very good explanatory text&#33; ;) Just multipliers, using some rather dense contextual post info from earlier, well...it&#39;s a bit confusing to say to the least. I am glad to see some examples of how to give a striaght base GB cost with stacking RP costs, as most Realm Spells already made seem to follow this example.

As for what to go with...as much as published D&D hates vagueries for fear of the rule-mongers, I think a combination of your listed options seems most prudent. In other words, publish a set of guidelines, and then print in big bold "you can&#39;t miss this" letters
"THIS IS NOT A HARD AND FAST SET OF RULES&#33; THESE ARE GUIDELINES FOR DM&#39;S AND PLAYERS TO BE ABLE TO DESIGN THEIR OWN REALM SPELLS. ANY NEW REALM SPELLS ARE SUBJECT TO DM APPROVAL."

...and so the rule mongers are squashed, the DM&#39;s retain some freedom to adjust and tweak as they see fit rather than feeling constricted by a system with no flexibility, and the designers get to play with and adjust a system to make it as good as possible within some rather arbitrary guidelines, those being the original 2e realm spell stats, which were somewhat ad hoc and individualized as Raesene mentioned.

That&#39;s my best "make everybody happy" solution...I&#39;m a big fan of creating and encouraging platforms for DM&#39;s to further expand their individual BR campaigns, and any design templates are great for that, so long as they are user-friendly enough (and we may have to see if we can&#39;t make this design template as user-friendly as possible). After all, with no more "official" publications by the original creators, Birthright is now in the hands of its fans...like us. It&#39;s our world now, baby&#33; :D

Raesene Andu
04-28-2004, 09:51 PM
That system definitely needs some major explanatory text before it makes in the BRCS, or any released form :) At the moment it is about 1/2 a page of info, but it will probably end up being closer to 2 pages in a final version.

I&#39;m going back to designing realm spell for now, although I&#39;ll keep refining this system as I use it to determine the GB and RP costs of new spells.

tcharazazel
04-29-2004, 02:00 AM
I am assuming it is the one about different costs for researching spells that are known versus researching new spells. That was how I read your original post that there should be 2 different costs to research a spell, one for the &#39;standard&#39; realm spells (i.e., those to be listed in the BRCS) and one for any new spells researched (new ones or variations of other spells that the character creates.).

This is what I was refering to. There are not 2 separate sets of costs to research a spell in 3.5. There is only one set or formula to be used regardless if it is a spell listed in the BRCS or not. The costing formulas that Ian has been working on and proposing make no distinction between a spell listed in the BRCS, something totally new or creating a variation of an already known spell.

Yep, because I was comparing a Realm spell not to the regular spell that people would spend time and money to research. I was comparing realm spells to Epic spells. Epic spells require more than just cash to research, they require exp.

However, I was saying that the known spells in the BCRS are spells that are more commonly known (heh, as more common as a realm spell can get, so prob all in the Imperial City) and thus i would agree with the idea that it only requires time and cash to research the known realm spells. While for the character to create a new realm spell it would require them to spend more cash than normal and some exp, as per an epic spell.

Though, as Reasene is using a dif system that is used to define new spells... this point was mostly a moot point. Unless you want to include in the idea that for a character to create a new realm spell that the costs would be higher, instead of just researching a known realm spell from someone elses library or the imperial city wizzie college.

tcharazazel
04-29-2004, 02:14 AM
raesene:

I would recomend increasing the modifier for 1year+ to be something like x 4.0 for 1 year and for each additional year.

irdeggman
04-29-2004, 09:57 AM
Originally posted by tcharazazel@Apr 28 2004, 09:00 PM

Yep, because I was comparing a Realm spell not to the regular spell that people would spend time and money to research. I was comparing realm spells to Epic spells. Epic spells require more than just cash to research, they require exp.

However, I was saying that the known spells in the BCRS are spells that are more commonly known (heh, as more common as a realm spell can get, so prob all in the Imperial City) and thus i would agree with the idea that it only requires time and cash to research the known realm spells. While for the character to create a new realm spell it would require them to spend more cash than normal and some exp, as per an epic spell.

Though, as Reasene is using a dif system that is used to define new spells... this point was mostly a moot point. Unless you want to include in the idea that for a character to create a new realm spell that the costs would be higher, instead of just researching a known realm spell from someone elses library or the imperial city wizzie college.
Yes, but there is no difference in the learning costs (time, money and/or exp) for any epic spell. They are all treated as individual spells regardless of how common they may be.

That was the point I was making, the 3.5 system makes no distinction in costs (gp, time, exp) for any spell researched regardless of it rarity.

There is no such thing as a &#39;common&#39; realm spell. The bonus from learning them from someone else is a bonus to the check made to learn them. So if learned at the Imperial College a situational modifier would apply.

I didn&#39;t see Ian address how to learn a realm spell only how much they cost (RP/GB wise) (basically this is for casting them as shown in the examples given).

I still think that the system for learning realm spells presented in the BRCS-playtest does a pretty good approximation of the epic spell system in this regard. A new means of limiting the number know by a spell caster and a system for determining costs (and spell level) is a good thing.

Raesene Andu
04-29-2004, 11:09 AM
I didn&#39;t address the issue of learning new realm spells. Personally I think the current system from the BRCS-playtest is good enough. The only issue I was looking at (and this was only because it was bought up) was a system for determining the RP and GB cost of realm spells.

However, now that you mention it, the time taken to research new realm spell is something that has been bought up a couple of time, especially by people who have used the BRCS rules. My idea on researching spell went something like this...

TIME:
Level 1-3 spells take 1 month to research
Level 4-6 spells take 2 months
Level 7-9 spells take 3 months
(This replaces the 1 month/level system which doesn&#39;t work well as it ties up a wizard&#39;s activities for years to research a single spell. This is even more of a problem in pbem BR games.)

COST:
1 GB/level of spell
(unchanged from original BRCS rules).

SUCCESS:
Spellcraft check (DC = 15 + level of spell). Add a +2 bonus if copying from another wizard&#39;s notes or spellbook. It is not possible to simple copy a realm spell, as the spell is cast using a different method for each caster.
(unchanged).

So the only change I&#39;d propose is to the length of time it takes to research the spell. Although you could add an additional modifier to the DC if the realm spell being researched is a completly new one... perhaps + level of spell again?

Osprey
04-29-2004, 01:38 PM
I&#39;m in favor of the new research times...I had thought one week per level was proposed before, but I think 1-3 months is even better (as I&#39;ve playtested a week per level, and it seems too easy).

However, I still think Spellcraft DC 15 + 2 per level of the spell is reasonable for a realm spell. I&#39;ve also playtested this, and found it not unreachable for a dedicateed caster...and if you&#39;re not dedicated, what are you doing trying to learn realm spells anyways? ;) Following the epic guidelines, though, what helps is if you let spellcasters use their primary ability modifier for their spellcraft skill (Wis for clerics, Cha for sorcerers), rather than Int for all Spellcraft checks. Then I just tack on a penalty if using Spellcraft for things like a cleric trying to identify a wizard&#39;s spell, for example.

As for number of realm spells known: I think one per caster level is a reasonable limit, then allowing one additional spell known per 5 ranks in the relavent Knowledge skill (Arcana, Religion, or Nature for mages, clerics, and druids resp.).

tcharazazel
04-29-2004, 08:27 PM
The issue i was bringin up is that its rather cheap to create a totally new realm spell (in Character) like mass destruction if its based off level 3 spell(s). it would only take 1 month and 3 GB. Heh, for a spell that can rain down and destroy so many units in one casting... its rather cheap.

While researching the spell off of someone else&#39;s realm spellbook(s) or from the wizzie college in the Imperial City it would make sense, I&#39;d say as it would be the charge(s) incurred in finding and paying the owner of the spell to copy it.

However, if they cant find any known copy of the spell, and are thus making it totally from scratch... heh, there would be higher expenses than just 3gb for all the testing, failures, ect until the final sucess. Especially if they plan on the spell including other casters to help them.

Honestly, to make it easier, you could just double the GB cost, add on an equal RP cost, and double the time. So, to create a new level 3 realm spell (in character) it would cost 6GB and 6RP and 2 months, while researching a known spell, like mass destruction, would cost just 3gb and 1 month. Easy to keep track of and follows your system more closely. Essentially the differnece between a known realm spell and an unknown realm spell would be at the DM&#39;s discretion.

The DM could make other spells not inthe BCRS and state these spell are also known and can just be researched. And the DM could also say that some other spells (even some in the BCRS) are not known and would thus need to be created. Heh, could also include adventures to find some parts of those new realm spells even, like special ingredients or an ancient wizzies spellbook or even creating embassies or Diplomacy actions to find some wizard(s) who know the realm spell.

irdeggman
04-29-2004, 10:56 PM
tcharazazel,

The concept of certain spells costing more to research than others of the same level is totally alien to 3.5. That is the point I was making.

Realm spells are all unique and tailored to the individual. No one caster&#39;s version will work for another. Hence there is no such thing as just copying the spell from a spell book. In fact in 3.5 there is no such thing as just copying a spell, a spellcaster has to make a spellcraft check to learn any new spell that he doesn&#39;t gain automatically via leveling up.

This is one of the main features of 3.5 spells. This concept also includes epic spells for that matter.

So introducing something like you are proposing would go against the 3.5 mechanics.

The difference in learning a spell with someone&#39;s aid or from some given source, like a spell book is reflected in the situational bonus applied to the spellcraft check made to learn the spell. For realm spells (like epic ones) the applicable skill used to learn a spell was going to be knowledge (arcana), (religion) or (nature) as applicable.

Now if the issue of learning a spell based off a 3rd level spell being so cheap is what is bothering you, then raising the &#39;seed&#39; spell level is the appropriate thing to do and not changing the method used to learn the spell such that there is more than one mechanic involved.

Raesene Andu
04-29-2004, 11:56 PM
The primary reason for changing the time it takes to research a spell is to give wizard&#39;s a chance to do something else (like actually cast realm spells :). The GB cost of research alone will prevent them from researching too many, as wizards never have enough gold to do much at all. And if you are still concerned, raise the DC...

One of the main things I&#39;m considering when revising this chapter is to take into consideration the comments everyone made about the chapter. There weren&#39;t many, but the one that did stand out was the research times for realm spells. So that is why it is likely to be changed as I&#39;ve suggested above.

tcharazazel
04-30-2004, 12:53 AM
Heheh, I guess you havent figured out why I&#39;m arguing for the higher costs of realm spells... I&#39;m getting it from yall, and the general consistant theme of keeping the BR world a lower magic setting. Its fine with me if its easy to learn these very powerful realm spells, however, to continue calling it a lower magic setting in such a case seems... contradictory.


Realm spells are all unique and tailored to the individual. No one caster&#39;s version will work for another. Hence there is no such thing as just copying the spell from a spell book. In fact in 3.5 there is no such thing as just copying a spell, a spellcaster has to make a spellcraft check to learn any new spell that he doesn&#39;t gain automatically via leveling up.

Point of fact: I had already suggested basing it off the spellcraft DCs as epic spells, earlier.

Heheh, realm spells are unique... right... so we have a listing of them in the BCRS... some how that just doesnt make sense. Especially when considering clerical realm spells who would be likely to keep the realm spells in a sacred text in their main temple and its passed on from Temple Leader to the next Temple Leader. I could agree to wizards having to write totally new realm spells every time... though with an imperial wizard college inthe imperial city... heh, so they actually dont offer standardized spells? what kind of college are they? would prob just have to ignore them then...


The primary reason for changing the time it takes to research a spell is to give wizard&#39;s a chance to do something else (like actually cast realm spells . The GB cost of research alone will prevent them from researching too many, as wizards never have enough gold to do much at all. And if you are still concerned, raise the DC...

Heheh, well i wasnt proposing the change for learning those realm spells that were in the BCRS, just those that weren&#39;t known. And really only level 1 realm spells would require more time than the BCRS version of having it take 1 month/level.

If youre basing the realm spell system only on wizards (and I know you&#39;re not) then you have to consider how much easier it is for the clerics... It looses its sense of balance in that regard if you bring it down to the LCD (lowest common denominator, namely the wizards) instead of an average of the classes that would use/benefit from the changes.

Heheh, wizards should be used to putting off rewards anyway :)

Raesene Andu
04-30-2004, 03:00 AM
Heheh, I guess you havent figured out why I&#39;m arguing for the higher costs of realm spells... I&#39;m getting it from yall, and the general consistant theme of keeping the BR world a lower magic setting. Its fine with me if its easy to learn these very powerful realm spells, however, to continue calling it a lower magic setting in such a case seems... contradictory.

Given that there are very few regent wizards in Cerilia, making realm spells quicker to learn does effect the low magic setting. I don&#39;t have my books with me, so I can&#39;t give you a fully accurate number of regent wizards and clerics, but it isn&#39;t a huge number (probably 15 or 20 wizards in Anuire). And I think by low magic everyone means no magic shops selling premade magical items, no wizard in every town and maybe only a magician in the larger towns.



Heheh, realm spells are unique... right... so we have a listing of them in the BCRS... some how that just doesnt make sense. Especially when considering clerical realm spells who would be likely to keep the realm spells in a sacred text in their main temple and its passed on from Temple Leader to the next Temple Leader. I could agree to wizards having to write totally new realm spells every time... though with an imperial wizard college inthe imperial city... heh, so they actually dont offer standardized spells? what kind of college are they? would prob just have to ignore them then...

A college without any source holdings, thus no realm spells. Anyway, the college of sorcery isn&#39;t going to teach realm spells to its students... well for obvious reasons that I don&#39;t think I need to spell out.

As for realm spells being unique, they can have the same effects and still be unique. In fact, I would think that most spells are cast differently for each wizard.

tcharazazel
04-30-2004, 03:42 AM
So, the college has lost all of its power and books ect from when it was in the empire? For although the College itself doesnt hold any source holdings those who ran it in the past certainly did and if the circle is still around it stil will.

Besides, currently the system doesnt require any source holdings to research realm spells, so why couldnt they have all of them? You&#39;d think that over time they would have collected them all really and standardized them, into the ones we&#39;re currently using in the BCRS. True you can make variants to them to make them "unique," however, they would hav the same effect and its not like you&#39;re coming up with something totally new that nobody has tried to make before.

Heheh, or are those spells ect only available to those higher up in the college? Like those wizards who are worthy of actually researching such spells? Like regent wizards?

Wizards aside though, what about the clerics? Would they keep such tomes of powerful realm spells and pass them along to their predecesor? Or do they not trust their predecesor with such knowledge? I could understand that some dont pass along the knowledge, like clerics of Krieisha, though most of them would.

Raesene Andu
04-30-2004, 04:34 AM
The college of sorcery was wiped off the face of Cerilia shortly after the death of Michael Roele and the collapse of the Anuirean Empire. The modern college is housed in what was an old barracks building, while the old college is a still smouldering ruin next door. Most of the old knowledge, magic, and indeed the source holding itself lies somewhere in the dungeons beneath the ruins...


I think you would need to control a source or temple before you were able to research realm spells, that is only logical. I think I&#39;ve made mention of needing to be a regent before (and can only be a regent if you control a holding), but I can change the info to better explain that. It doesn&#39;t make sense that you could research a realm spell that requires a source or temple to cast without actually controlling a source or temple to cast it with. To use a RW example, it would be like trying to determine how two chemicals will react without having any of the chemicals to actually test your theories...

And by unique, I mean the way they are cast, rather than the effects of spell, or even the spell itself. For example, one wizard might cast his realm spells by carving runes, another by slaughtering small furry animals, another by burning incense, and so on. The way each wizard casts the spell is unique to that particular wizard...

As for Clerics, well I can see you point. However, learning a ritual used to cast a realm spell would still take time. There is perhaps a case for reducing the cost of learning clerical realm spells. In the original 2E rules, clerics automatically learned the standard realm spells, only wizards had to research their spells... I don&#39;t know how this tallies with 3.5E rules for learning clerical spells.

tcharazazel
04-30-2004, 04:59 AM
yeah, clerics still automatically know their spells in 3.5



I think you would need to control a source or temple before you were able to research realm spells, that is only logical. I think I&#39;ve made mention of needing to be a regent before (and can only be a regent if you control a holding), but I can change the info to better explain that. It doesn&#39;t make sense that you could research a realm spell that requires a source or temple to cast without actually controlling a source or temple to cast it with. To use a RW example, it would be like trying to determine how two chemicals will react without having any of the chemicals to actually test your theories...


Ok, so when you are researching new spells then you are actually trying to cast them to some extent before you have mastered them... If this is how you view it, then you are actually agreeing with what i said before, concerning learning new realm spells. That learning new spells would require GB AND RP because all realm spells require RP to cast. Although what I was saying that it was for new realm spells, however, you&#39;ve made the point that every realm spell is "unique." Heh, so then each would really require the same as a creating a new realm spell.

Actually: thinking about it some more, maybe the clerics would be the ones who would get out of using RP to research realm spells, so for them the GB costs to spend the time studying their Spiritual Texts (that have the realm spells) would be more fitting... or Just halve the costs for clerics maybe?

So to learn a level 4 spell it would be 4 GB and 4 RP for a wizard, and either 2 GB or 2GB and 2 RP for a cleric.

irdeggman
04-30-2004, 09:18 AM
As far as listing spells in a book and them not being common - the epic spells are treated that way. Each one is &#39;unique&#39; to the caster and even though there are no arcane or divine epic spells per se (whether or not it is arcane or divine depends on who learned it) the ones perceived as typically divine are not automatically &#39;gained&#39; when the character levels up.

Clerics and wizards are handled the exact same way for learning epic spells, that is no one automatically learns an epic spell - everyone has to make a knowledge check. So there is no reduced cost or time for clerics as compared to wizards.

As far as low magic world of Cerilia - most people (long time fans that is) consider this to better translate into low number of magic items not really low magic. Supposedly there are &#39;fewer&#39; spell casters than in a normal campaign world, but they have access to higher magic (realm spells). IMO actually there are pretty much the same number of spellcasters (% wise) but they are limited in what they can cast (lesser magic) {the number of characters capable of caster greater magic is less than a typical campaign world due to the special restrictions placed on them in Cerilia} and by location (arcane caster of any type are extremely rare in the Rjurik Highlands and Vosgaard, while much more common in the Khinasi lands than in most typical campaign settings, the same can be said about divine casters - the type is limited by the culture in most cases).

By the way what does "heh" and/or "heheh" refer to? Is it an acronym or just an attempt at an evil laugh? Not understanding has caused great confusion to me. :(

tcharazazel
04-30-2004, 09:33 AM
no actually, this is an evil laugh: MWAHAHAHAHAHA&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;

heh, and heheh, is just me being amused by what ive read, generally, otherwise I&#39;m just laughing at the obvious.


Though now you&#39;re refering to realm spells to epic spells, I thought we got over that really, however, if you want to bring that back then you would notice that the cost for epic spells is a hella lot more than realm spells as epic requires both gold and experience to create, though they may not require any gold or experience to cast, while realm spells Only require gold to create.

This is definately totally different than what you have been saying realm spells are like, so I just pointed out what Raesene said that it would require testing to actually create the realm spell, and as realm spells require both GB and RP to cast then it would make sense for the testing it would require the use of some GB and RP.

Finally, if you wish to maintain the stance that every realm spell is "unique" then you would have to accept that they are creating a new realm spell every time, and this would require a lot more time and effort than just 1-3 months and 1-9 GB. Because, if they are all "unique," then copying another&#39;s spell or acquiring the Temple&#39;s Secret Tome with its realm spells would effectively be useless to them. And this explanation is the only logical reason for why it would only cost the character a 1-3 months and few GB to research/learn the realm spell. Thus, by taking away this explanation for the lower costs then really only the aforementioned costs (GB and RP) would be appropriate.

Osprey
04-30-2004, 03:01 PM
First off: Lowering costs for clerics learning realm spells?&#33;? No way&#33; Clerics have way more GB than mages, the last thing I&#39;d want to do is make it cheaper for them to learn.

I agree with Irdeggman that realm spells should be standardized so that researching them takes the same amount of time and resources regardless of character class, especially as it seems the list of options for clerics is being opened way up so that wizards no longer get the much broader palette of available realm spells they once had in original BR.

As for who can research them: tcharazazel&#39;s point that researching them should take RP and GB makes plenty of sense to me if we&#39;re assuming that only a regent may learn realm spells. However, I would expand "regent" to include "invested Lieutenants" as well, assuming they can access the temples or sources as if they were a regent. This allows heirs and blooded mage apprentices to begin learning realm spells before they become regents themselves, or cast realm spells along with other lieutenant actions. Thus, the High Mage Aelies&#39; heir, for example, might succeed to her master&#39;s position already knowing a few basic realm spells like Dispel Realm Magic, Scry Province, and/or Alchemy.


Finally, if you wish to maintain the stance that every realm spell is "unique" then you would have to accept that they are creating a new realm spell every time, and this would require a lot more time and effort than just 1-3 months and 1-9 GB. Because, if they are all "unique," then copying another&#39;s spell or acquiring the Temple&#39;s Secret Tome with its realm spells would effectively be useless to them. And this explanation is the only logical reason for why it would only cost the character a 1-3 months and few GB to research/learn the realm spell. Thus, by taking away this explanation for the lower costs then really only the aforementioned costs (GB and RP) would be appropriate.

Here is where I&#39;d simply stop comparing epic spells to realm spells. Epic everything is exponentially more expensive, in gold and xp, than is realistic for most any setting...few regents in BR could afford to learn even the "simplest" epic spells. My advice: ignore most of the epic spell system, especially the statistical particulars like cost and DC&#39;s, but pull from it the general useful concepts like mitigating factors or number of spells known.

In general, you should compare (but not equate) realm spells to their personal-scale seeds. Think of it this way: it takes only 3-5 DAYS for a wizard to learn a level 1-3 spell, while taking 32 days (1 month) to learn a level 1-3 realm spell. And the gap grows significantly for higher level realm spells, which are the really big whammies of ritual magic in the BR setting.

And again I&#39;ll say it, because I feel really strongly about it: DC 15 + 2 per level of the realm spell to learn it. DO NOT MAKE IT TOO EASY TO MASTER A REALM SPELL&#33; I really hate the concept that all of this complexity and intricacy that supposedly goes into learning a realm spell is, at the end, dead easy to master (because what mage worth his salt can&#39;t make the standard DC 15+1 per level Spellcraft check? And clerics learning realm spells should also be encouraged to be competent crafters of complex magics).

If we allow a bonus to this check for access to another regent&#39;s spellbook or holy tome (like a +2 synergy bonus), this DC becomes a little more reachable. If we grant this bonus for the standard spell DC, well, it&#39;s even more ridiculously easy. Enough said.

tcharazazel
04-30-2004, 03:12 PM
Here is where I&#39;d simply stop comparing epic spells to realm spells. Epic everything is exponentially more expensive, in gold and xp, than is realistic for most any setting...few regents in BR could afford to learn even the "simplest" epic spells. My advice: ignore most of the epic spell system, especially the statistical particulars like cost and DC&#39;s, but pull from it the general useful concepts like mitigating factors or number of spells known.


Heheh, yeah its why i dropped the epic spell comparison to realm spells, earlier.

Aye, if the DC to master the realm spell is 15 + 2/spell level then it would definately be harder and more appropriate. For those who want to keep it a lower setting then it would make sense, as most people shouldnt be able to cast the higher level realm spells anyway. And for those who want to keep going then it would cause the characters to keep up their spellcraft ranks :) and probably look for means to increase it more, ie skill focus ect.

irdeggman
04-30-2004, 03:40 PM
Osprey,

Sometimes you amaze me in how you can rephrase what I&#39;ve said so that it becomes clearer what I meant. :lol:

I agree with you almost 100% (I just refuse to say I agree with anyone 100% even if I can&#39;t find something I disagree with).


If the cost of researching a realm spell is expressed in GB and RP and has &#39;access&#39; to a source/temple of the appropriate level I think this will fit pretty much into your intent for allowing Lts the ability to research a realm spell (which I also agree with). Lts can have RP &#39;given&#39; to them for this purpose by their soveign as well as &#39;access&#39; to the appropriate holding. The only question would be is researching a realm spell a standard domain action or a court action, using the present BRCS venacular. If it is a standard action then it is more restrictive in how a Lt can accomplish this - I think it fits that way though, it will keep people from having &#39;research&#39; machines, NPCs whose sole function is to gain realm spells.

Just to point out, as Osprey mentioned the problems whencomparing epic spells with realm spells. I never once said to use the &#39;cost&#39; from epic spells or to even consider that part of the comparison - that was always introduced by someone else whenever I brought up the comparisions. I had said to use the checks for learning and the limit on the number of spells known and finally made the comparison to them when stating that just because a spell is listed in a book doesn&#39;t mean that it is commonly known. Epic spells, like realm spells are unique to each individual caster even though they may function similarly.

Thanks again Osprey.

Raesene Andu
04-30-2004, 09:15 PM
Originally posted by Osprey@May 1 2004, 12:31 AM
I agree with Irdeggman that realm spells should be standardized so that researching them takes the same amount of time and resources regardless of character class, especially as it seems the list of options for clerics is being opened way up so that wizards no longer get the much broader palette of available realm spells they once had in original BR.

There won&#39;t be that many new spells for cleric. A couple of the arcane spells are becoming available to clerics of specific gods and each god get 1-2 realm spells that can only be cast by clerics of that god. Most are healing, warding, or protection type spells, no battle, summoning, or destruction type realm spells among them.


Winterís Fury
(Transmutation)

Spell Level: Divine [Kriesha] 3
Gold: 4 GB
Regency: 12 RP
Target: One province
Duration: 1 week + 2 days/level
Required Holding: Temple 3

In the cold wastes of Vosgaard, many travellers have reported sudden storms that appear out of nowhere and last for days. With this realm spell, a cleric can summon a powerful blizzard that covers an entire province, trapping invaders and potentially ending an attack if the invader is unprepared for the deadly conditions. The cleric may prevent the spell from taking effect for up to a week before its power overwhelms her control and the blizzard in unleashed.
The spell is not limited by the season and even in the middle of summer; those caught in the province take the full effects of the conditions. After the blizzard has passed, the snow dropped by the blizzard can be up to several feet deep and this could cause additional problems for invaders and the provinceís population.
Army units caught unprepared by the blizzard conditions suffer one hit of subdual damage for each hour of exposure, unless they find suitable shelter. An army prepared for winter conditions must still find shelter, but have up to a day before the conditions begin to take their toll. If they are unable to find shelter after a day, units take one hit of subdual damage for each day of exposure. Soldiers in a unit reduced to 0 hits will die unless they are immediately given shelter and aid.
Individuals caught unprepared by the blizzard suffer the effects of extreme cold and severe winds, as described in the section on the environment in the Dungeon Masterís guide.


Dead Seas
(Transmutation)

Spell Level: Divine [Nesirie] 7
Gold: 2 GB
Regency: 4 RP/ocean area
Target: 1 ocean area/3 levels
Duration: 3 months
Required Holding: Temple 1

Just as it is wise to seek the blessing of the goddess of the sea before setting out on any ocean voyage, it is wise never to anger Nesirie if you should ever wish to again travel in her domain. This spell is often granted to the high priests of the Nesirieís temples to use against those who do not respect the goddess or her followers.
With this spell a priest can affect the weather to deprive adjacent coastal areas of wind for up to three months. This makes it impossible for non-oared vessels to sail out of, or through the affected areas. Any vessel that attempts to do so will be becalmed, trapped until the spell ends. Oared vessels are unaffected and may move through the region as normal.
This spell may affect up to 1 ocean area/3 levels, and the affected areas must be adjacent to provinces where the priest has a temple.

tcharazazel
04-30-2004, 09:42 PM
ooo, they look cool reasene.

tcharazazel
05-05-2004, 11:07 PM
ok so to sum up what has been propsed for the changes in realm spells then:

1) Creation of some new realm spells, like the 1-2 per diety specific realm spells, provided by Raesene.

2) use the realm spell creation system to make new realm spells, provided by Raesene.

3) use the new realm spell time frame for learning realm spells. level 1-3 = 1 month, level 4-6 = 2 months, level 7-9 = 3 months.

4) researching realm spells costs GB and RP = to the spells level

5) Those researching realm spells must have access to a source/temple of the appropriate level.

6) Researching realm spells is a domain standard action (thus source/temple regent Lt.s could only learn a realm spell once a season.)

7) DC to research a realm spell = 15 + 2 per spell level. And we keep the +2 synergy bonus for someone helping


Anything else thats missing on the list here?

Do we like all these proposed changes? I do

Raesene Andu
05-05-2004, 11:35 PM
I think that sums up the changes quite nicely.

Only note I&#39;d make is that I&#39;ll probably come up with a fair number of new realm spells and then trim that list back to maybe 10 or so new realm spells. I&#39;ve released a couple of examples, but as soon as I&#39;ve done the rest I&#39;ll release the lot as a single document for discussion.

tcharazazel
05-24-2004, 12:13 AM
Raesene, with regard to your proposed realm spell creation system, Osprey and I were trying it out and found that when we tried to make some new realm spells, like protection from arrows, that it was rather cheap to make. The higher level spells like a realm version of Horrid Wilting that would basically destroy the province were also much too cheap. For example:

Level 8 spell (Horrid Wilting) so base cost of 8 GB/RP x 0.5 for province x 2.0 for enemy x 1.5 for 3 months = 12 GB/RP for a spell that could easily destroy a province by killing all the commoners who would very unlikely make their saves and even if they did a level 15 caster would sill do 15d6 / 2 damage which would kill any 1 HD commoner and certainly all the farm animals. Heh, it would also totally detroy any crops, forests ect that they had in the proivince as it would do 15d8 damage to the plants. Honestly it would only need like 1 month to nearly destroy all life in the province, though as its 3 months it will certainly kill everything. To be unrealistic and nice, we could say that it drops the Province level and Source level by 1/3 each month. Thus, the Province and Source level of the province would drop to 0 by the end of the spell. For 12 GB/RP its definately cheap. Imagine if it was for multiple targets... then it would be 12 GB/RP x 0.5 for multiple targets = 6 GB/RP and to make it a fixed GB cost would make it 6 RP x 2.0 for fixxed GB cost = 12 RP per province and 6 GB to cast the spell. very inexpensive to completely destroy the enemy, especially for higher level characters.

A possible solution to this is to dramatically increase the costs of higher level spells, or have the costs increase on a per level basis for the higher level spells, 5+, instead of grouping the 5-6 and 7-8 level spells.

We missed the sliding scale for spell duration, ect based upon the caster level. For example, the BRCS realm spell Battle Seeming has Target = 1 unit/level and Duration 1 week/level.

We also thought that it may be a good idea to just split the Individual and Unit from the Province realm spells as they both in general follow different durations. In the BRCS, the Individual and Unit generally go by weeks, due to War moves going by weeks, while the Province go by months.
That way it would split the system into 2 smaller parts that are easier to follow and create realm spells.

Finally, how are you determining the Temple or Source Holdings required to Cast the realm spells? It would make sense that it would be related to the spell level, however, not sure exactly how it was determined in the BRCS as that doesnt seem to be the case all of the time. Anyway, once the required holding level is determined for the spell, then increasing the requireed holding level would result in a decrease in the spell cost while decreasing the holding level would result in an increase in the spell cost.

Overall, it seems like your basic system just needs some refining/tinkering and soon it will run smoothly.

Raesene Andu
05-24-2004, 05:44 AM
Ages ago I came up with a spell that mirrored the effects of Horrid Wilting and I gave it a GP cost of 10 GB and a RP cost of 2 RP/level of province. However, it also had a source holding of level 8, which is almost impossible to achieve.

I think the required holding should reflect the spells power, so level of holding should roughly = level of spell being converted. If you want to reduce the source holding required, then you would need to spend more GB and RP to cast the spell.

Osprey
05-24-2004, 07:08 AM
Taking out the multiple targets = x0.5 multiplier would go a long way toward preventing spells from being too cheap, as most realm spells can affect multiple targets. Also, it is more powerful/efficient to use an entire domain action to affect multiple targets rather than just one, so why design a single-target realm spell anyways, if it will cost twice as much? I thinkpenalizing a single target spell is like stacking the disadvantages fir such a spell upon itself. Unnecesary IMO.

The other big "el cheapo" effect is the willing target multiplier. I&#39;d assume willing targets are the default, and leave it at x1 rather than x0.5. especially since enemy target is already x2.0, isn&#39;t that enough of a difference?

Durations based on caster level definitely need to be addressed, unless you are proposing that that system is being thrown out, and all realm spell durations in the 3.5 BRCS will have set durations?

The default seems to be:
Target is unit or personal: 1 week/level
Target is province: 1 month/level

How should this be addressed?

Osprey

Osprey
06-07-2004, 04:03 AM
Raesene.
The discussion on maintenance for summoned units gave me an idea.

What if realm spell durations were limited as mentioned before,

Target is unit or personal: 1 week/level maximum
Target is province: 1 month/level maximum


Now: what if long-term realm spells had to be sustained with RP maintenance? In practice this might equate to periodic rituals designed to sustain and extend the spell, and in mechanical terms cost 1 RP per month per province or unit affected. I&#39;m not certain about the RP costs, but twhat do you think of the concept?

Osprey

Raesene Andu
06-07-2004, 04:19 AM
I&#39;m not opposed to the idea of using RP to maintain spells long term. I&#39;d have to check it out against the spells that were going to be maintained to see how they balance, but in general terms I think it is something that could work.

Athos69
06-07-2004, 05:48 AM
Ian: What are we going to do about the Scry Province spell? Since the Scry skill no longer exists, what skill are we going to use for this? (since provinces generally don&#39;t get a Will Save)

If this becomes too difficult, maybe we need to bring back the Scry skill for BR.... and have it apply to the realm-level spell as well as the locating of mebhaighl currents...

Raesene Andu
06-08-2004, 01:47 AM
In my own game, I bought back the scry skills, although my campaign is primarily a 3.0 one, as I never bought the 3.5E books (I did download the updated SRD though).

The whole locating source issue is one I&#39;m going to look at very closely.

Athos69
06-08-2004, 09:47 AM
Well since we&#39;re discussing Chapter 1, we&#39;ll need to come to a decision on this relatively quiclky.

tcharazazel
06-08-2004, 10:04 AM
I&#39;m all for keeping the Scry skill.

Osprey
06-08-2004, 04:45 PM
Yep, I&#39;ve maintained the Scry skill in my own game too - it&#39;s a great mechanic that they never should have dropped - the one really mature element of D&D&#39;s magic system, and they let it drop. Probably was making the rest of the system look too campy in comparison. ;)

So, yes, I&#39;m all for keeping Scry, 3.5 be damned&#33;

Osprey

Athos69
06-08-2004, 07:00 PM
As am I... and since the Realm spell is available to Druids, it should be a class skill for them as well.

Osprey
06-09-2004, 06:21 AM
Scrying should be a class skill for anyone capable of scrying. If the scry skill is to be kept, it must be kept for normal scrying as well. It simply isn&#39;t worthwhile to have the skill only for a single realm spell.

This would make every major spellcasting class have Scry as a class skill: Bards, Clerics, Magicians, Sorcerers, and Wizards.

Athos69
06-09-2004, 07:23 AM
I would make a case contrary to that. With a standard Scry spell, you are using arcane means to find a specific person, see/hear his environs within 10&#39; and open a small portal through wich you can cast divinations. Since the spell is specifically targeted, and can be foiled by a variety of methods, it is only fitting that we keep that spell as written. Besides, the game mechanics forced the change to using a Will save instead of a fighter needing to put ranks into Scry to counter it.

In the case of a Scry Province, we are dealing with a different kettle of fish. The spell description states that it creates "many magical sensors that move throughout the province." Since there isn&#39;t a specific target, we can&#39;t use a Will save to counter this. It would be a case of the skill of the wizard or druid casting this spell to manage the large number of sensors and sort through the flood of information that comes back to them through the link.

It is this reasoning that forms the basis of my belief that the Realm spell should be skill based, and the normal spell will-save based.

tcharazazel
06-09-2004, 07:54 AM
Actually, the strongest arguement you should use is that Bards, Clerics, Druids, Magicians and Sorcerors and Wizards, All have the Scry skill in 3.0. So, as we plan on keeping the skill, it should remain class skills for them. The reason why they had it as a class skill, was because they could cast scying spells.

Athos69
06-09-2004, 08:55 AM
Yes, but in 3.0 Scry was required to cast the Scry and Greater Scrying spells. Those were updated in 3.5 to eliminate the need for that specific skill. We can&#39;t update the Scry Province realm spell to use a Will save, since it isn&#39;t targeted on a specific person, so we must retain the skill for this application.

If only Arcane casters and Druids have access to the Scry Province spell, then the Scry skill should be limited to those classes as a class skill.

tcharazazel
06-09-2004, 10:14 AM
Heheh, I meant that we keep the scry skill and spells the way they were in 3.0. Because bringn it back just for the realm spell, wouldnt be worth it.

irdeggman
06-09-2004, 03:41 PM
I&#39;d propose just the opposite. Drop the scry skill entirely. Rewrite the realm spell to match the scry spell more closely and probably switch to Knowledge (nature) as the skill to use to locate ley lines, etc. if that methodology is kept.

Going back to 3.0 is just wrong IMO. We are supposed to be changing/evolving to 3.5 not forcing a rewrite of the mechanics in 3.5 just to fit an idea based on a 3.0 mechanic that was changed. In 2nd ed finding these things (ley lines, etc.) wasn&#39;t allowed unless a character could cast the appropriate spell in the first place.

Azulthar
06-09-2004, 04:48 PM
I agree, making this game 3.5-compatible is a high-priority, and reinstalling an old 3.0 skill for the sake of a single realm spell is not the way to go. Rewriting the realm spell would be a much cleaner solution. If people like the Scry skill and wish to keep it, houserule it like you are no doubt already houseruling it for the standard spells.

RaspK_FOG
06-09-2004, 11:09 PM
AND, there is a cleaner method in case you want to write such a spell: caster level checks&#33; If the player has to succeed at a certain DC according to his attempt, that would be just fine, I believe...

Or, if you have to go skill-style, have him make a Spellcraft check: the skill is supposed to be used in understanding or utilising magical forces.

Osprey
02-27-2005, 04:57 PM
Just thought I&#39;d post here and draw attention to this previous discussion on a revised Chapter 7, including some ideas for a realm spell conversion system and a few new realm spells.

Osprey