Page 2 of 33 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 321
  1. #11
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Rome (Italy)
    Posts
    28
    Downloads
    18
    Uploads
    0
    The idea of a separate spell lists for Elven wizards is pretty easy to do and balance, I think. It just shouldn't be characterized as a "school" - schools are mainly supposed to gather up certain types of effects (with subschools and descriptors as subdividers). Unlike 2e, there's a lot of different spell lists in 3e - making a new spell list is no problem. I just don't think calling it a "school" is a good idea. I know this sounds pedantic, but it's much easier to communicate an idea if we keep our concepts clear.
    I think it’s better to speak of a new school. In Spells&Magic (a second edition accessory) additional schools were created: alchemy, force, elemental... The spells included in those new schools were taken from the traditional ones. A distinction was made between schools of effect and of philosophy. The same can be done with the third edition. The “nature school” should include abjurations, conjurations, divinations and so on, dealing with nature.

    Making it cost a feat should IMO only be necessary if you actually gain access to additional spells, instead of simply changing one spell list for another.
    But you do. The spells included in the “nature school” can be taken only if you are Elf or Half-Elf. If you are not then you must take the feat in order to gain the new spells. I consider the new school as a racial knowledge that may be learned by non elves but at the cost of two talents (considering also the Skill Focus) and a specialisation.

  2. #12
    Birthright Developer irdeggman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach, Virginia
    Posts
    3,945
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Originally posted by Elrond

    The idea of a separate spell lists for Elven wizards is pretty easy to do and balance, I think. It just shouldn't be characterized as a "school" - schools are mainly supposed to gather up certain types of effects (with subschools and descriptors as subdividers). Unlike 2e, there's a lot of different spell lists in 3e - making a new spell list is no problem. I just don't think calling it a "school" is a good idea. I know this sounds pedantic, but it's much easier to communicate an idea if we keep our concepts clear.
    I think it’s better to speak of a new school. In Spells&Magic (a second edition accessory) additional schools were created: alchemy, force, elemental... The spells included in those new schools were taken from the traditional ones. A distinction was made between schools of effect and of philosophy. The same can be done with the third edition. The “nature school” should include abjurations, conjurations, divinations and so on, dealing with nature.
    I think what Mark_Aurel is referring to is an "elf spell list" which would be limited to characters of elven blood. This would be similar to the 3.5 racial weapons lists. A racial spell list would probably be the least intrusive way to handle this. Any spell (normally divine or arcane) can be added to a new spell list so it shouldn't much make a difference, also wizard/sorcerer spells could be added this list in addition to the nature/plant oriented divine ones.:)
    Duane Eggert

  3. #13
    Birthright Developer irdeggman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach, Virginia
    Posts
    3,945
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Originally posted by Elrond

    Elven Arcane Lore [General]

    You have mastered the fundamentals of elven arcane lore.
    Prerequisites: Non elven-blooded wizard, Skill Focus (Knowledge Arcana).
    Benefits: Upon taking this feat the wizard gains access to the elven “nature school” and becomes a specialist. He must choose necromancy and either evocation or conjuration as opposite schools.
    He can still use the prohibited spells he knew prior to taking this feat, including using items that are activated by spell completion or spell trigger.

    My idea is that this kind of magic may only be learned (this excludes sorcerers) by non elven-blooded characters and specialisation should be necessary for them. To achieve this, they need to take the Elven Arcane Lore feat.
    On the contrary, elven-blooded sorcerers and wizards are free to select spells from the new “nature school” and the latter may specialise in that school. They don’t need to take the feat because the new spells are natural to elven sorcerers and part of the arcane teachings of elven wizardry.

    By requiring a character with this feat to become a specialist wizard is pretty restrictive. Stating that he can use any spells/items from the oppositin listed that he knew before taking the feat is contrary to the way that specialist wizards work. Once an oppositin school always an opposition school - that is the point of being an opposition school. Also why require an opposition school when necraomancy is pretty much already a racial opposition school, hence no drawback to make up for the bonuses granted by specializing (an extra spell per day, better Spellcraft checks).:)
    Duane Eggert

  4. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    883
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Mark_Aurel wrote:

    >This post was generated by the Birthright.net message forum.
    > You can view the entire thread at: http://www.birthright.net/read.php?TID=1651
    >
    > Mark_Aurel wrote:
    >
    ...

    >Other things to consider for an Elven "nature mage" might be things like his bonus feats - scribe scroll doesn`t sound very appropriate by itself, though you could assume an alternate medium (i.e. "print spell on bark")
    >
    In the "Quintessential Wizard" from Mongoose publishing several examples
    of alternate "scrolls" are given, e.g. rune stones (I think they sound
    much like the stones the elven wizard in the Shadow Stone uses) or wood
    slats.
    bye
    Michael

    ************************************************** **************************
    The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
    Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
    To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
    with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

  5. #15
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Rome (Italy)
    Posts
    28
    Downloads
    18
    Uploads
    0
    Why create a new school and not just implement the traditional ones? Because the new spells can easily belong to traditional schools for the elves but should constitute an entirely new school for non elven wizards. The latter ones must specialise in the elven arcane lore. They cannot learn, for example, Invisibility to Animals as an illusion spell, Detect Animals or Plants as a divination, Summon Nature’s Ally I as a conjuration or Animal Friendship as an enchantment, like elves do. They must learn them from the “nature school”. On the other hand, elven wizards may either specialise in the new school, take these new spells from the traditional schools or take (for example) Invisibility to Animals from the “nature school” even if they are specialised in illusion and count divination (but not “nature”) as an opposition school.

  6. #16
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Rome (Italy)
    Posts
    28
    Downloads
    18
    Uploads
    0
    By requiring a character with this feat to become a specialist wizard is pretty restrictive.
    I know, but it must be restrictive. Few non elven wizards should learn that kind of magic.

    Stating that he can use any spells/items from the oppositin listed that he knew before taking the feat is contrary to the way that specialist wizards work. Once an oppositin school always an opposition school - that is the point of being an opposition school.
    It's the way specialisation works for an Incantatrix. Since you cannot say that Elven Arcane Lore is a feat to be taken when the character is created, I followed the example of an existing rule.

    Also why require an opposition school when necraomancy is pretty much already a racial opposition school, hence no drawback to make up for the bonuses granted by specializing (an extra spell per day, better Spellcraft checks).:)
    Pretty much... And you have to choose another school (conjuration or evocation).

  7. #17
    Birthright Developer
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    949
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    I think it’s better to speak of a new school. In Spells&Magic (a second edition accessory) additional schools were created: alchemy, force, elemental... The spells included in those new schools were taken from the traditional ones. A distinction was made between schools of effect and of philosophy. The same can be done with the third edition. The “nature school” should include abjurations, conjurations, divinations and so on, dealing with nature.
    Bingo. You can't take a 2e way of looking at spells and apply it to 3e. There are no spells in 3e that belong to multiple schools of magic. The schools of magic are used in a specific, precise mechanical way, to define a lot of different effects and immunities. Moving things around can create some weird effects. From a mechancial viewpoint, the schools of magic, as well as subschools and descriptors, were built into 3e to make the system easier to use for the purpose of categoric effects. Shifting spells between schools can create some pretty illogical effects (of course, the system as is isn't necessarily perfectly logical, but it works).

    I still think Spells & Magic was a pretty good accessory for its time - it contained lots of diverse, useful material and ideas, and was solidly written overall. In 3e terms, though, the new schools it introduced wouldn't work as schools - they'd more likely be separate spell lists - not new schools by themselves; that's sort of hardcoded into the system core, and the new wizard specialists would be some kind of prestige class, or feat.

    There's really no reason why you can't make it a new school - you'd just have to rewrite a large section of the PHB and the spell lists as part of your house rules. It's a much better and less intrusive way to make a separate spell list instead. Use the base wizard list, drop most necromancy effects and area effect evocations, add a lot of druid spells, and I think you have what you want - in a way that doesn't require tampering with the core of the game's spell system.
    Jan E. Juvstad.

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Malden, MA
    Posts
    761
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    On Thu, 15 May 2003, Elrond wrote:

    > Third edition, of course.

    Not necessarily. My BR campaign is still 2e (albeit heavily modified),
    because I haven`t yet found or made a 3e conversion I like. I`m thinking
    even more strongly of taking it to something that isn`t D&D at all;
    however, I still like to talk about how I`d do it in D&D. =)

    > I`m one of the few Italians (I`m sorry for my English)

    No need to apologize: your English is excellent. Better than the kind
    spoken by many of my fellow Americans, actually -- as is the case with
    many of the non-native speakers on this list. :)

    > So let`s specify, in the description of elves and half-elves, that
    > elven blooded arcane spellcasters have free access to spells from the
    > "nature school" (to be created) and let`s introduce a new general feat
    > (for non elven wizards): "elven arcane lore".

    Sounds like a fine plan. I`m not keen on the specialization rule, though.
    I think it makes perfect sense that for non-elves to gain access to elven
    nature magic, they must sacrifice their ability to cast necromantic
    spells. I`m torn on the topic of whether specialists who have already
    sacrificed necromancy by choosing it as an opposition school should be
    able to take this feat without giving up anything else, or if they should
    be forced to lose evocation as well. However, I don`t think they should
    be required to specialize in nature magic. Certainly they can if they
    wish, but I can see a place both for generalists with a different list and
    for specialists in other schools. I suspect this feat would be extremely
    popular among Khinasi wizards, who are already forbidden to do necromancy;
    Rjurik wizards who wish to please the druids, work alongside them or even
    pretend to be one of them; and all those, especially specialist enchanters
    and illusionists, who wish to ingratiate themselves with the elves in the
    hopes of being accepted as students.

    > My idea is that this kind of magic may only be learned (this excludes
    > sorcerers) by a non elven-blooded characters

    I don`t see why it should exclude sorcerers; could you please explain?


    Ryan Caveney

    ************************************************** **************************
    The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
    Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
    To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
    with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

  9. #19
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Rome (Italy)
    Posts
    28
    Downloads
    18
    Uploads
    0
    Bingo. You can't take a 2e way of looking at spells and apply it to 3e. There are no spells in 3e that belong to multiple schools of magic.
    Right... Then for elven wizards and sorcerers you take the new spells and distribute them among the traditional schools. Non elven wizards may learn these spells (as an additional spell list) through the Elven Arcane Lore, and specialise on it, but must take necromancy and either conjuration or summoning as opposite schools.

    I don`t think they should be required to specialise in nature magic.
    They should because, if history says that they have learned true magic from the elves, these spells represent the secret lore of the elven race, a knowledge that cannot be gained easily. You need a lot of research... a specialisation.

    I don`t see why it should exclude sorcerers; could you please explain?
    Because elven sorcerers have a unique link with the land and these spells should testify it. This link cannot be taught. Wizards, on the other side, learn the mechanics of magic and this can be taught.

  10. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    94
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    I have always thought of elves as something like the jann.

    Perhaps a small template of ECL+1 like the tables in Manual of Planes for half-elemental.

    Even commoners would have small spell-like ability.

    With using the community creation rules from the DMG, most of, if not all of the 1st level NPC-classes would not exist as they are ECL2. This would help explain the lower population in elven provinces.

    Even a common elf is more powerful than a common human.

    Humans advantage is numbers and divine guidance.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
BIRTHRIGHT, DUNGEONS & DRAGONS, D&D, the BIRTHRIGHT logo, and the D&D logo are trademarks owned by Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and are used by permission. ©2002-2010 Wizards of the Coast, Inc.