| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Wenin |
Posted - 21 Jan 2010 : 03:38:20
I find that cantrips to be a rich grounds to pull up Roleplaying tools. I especially love how Pathfinder's cantrips work.
So why didn't the original designers and even Pathfinder allow for bonus spells base don high INT abilities. |
| 17 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Alystra Illianniis |
Posted - 24 Jan 2010 : 21:04:25
TSR did eventually get around to using the cantrip rules from 1st ed in 2nd ed. They were listed in Vol. 4 of the Complete Wizard's Spell Compendium (in the index and misc. setion in the back.) They did have the categories and cantrips from the Dragon issues, as well as some world-specific ones, and used the rules for replacing a 1st level spell with four cantrips. I have Volumes 1, 2, and 4 (never got 3) and use them frequently for obscure spells to annoy my players with. The cantrips were a lot of fun, and I really don't know why they did not put in extra slots for Int bonuses in 3rd ed. I usually treat them as an unlimited-use spell level, since they are suposed to take up so little space in a spellcaster's memory. There was a similar rule set for clerics, called orisons, but I don't remember the specifics. Sadly, I only ever picked up one volume of the Cleric's Spell Compendium. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 24 Jan 2010 : 14:04:17
quote:
Originally posted by Fizilbert
quote:
As I recall, the 1E idea of cantrips was that you used four cantrips in place of a single 1st-level spell. The proficiency idea gave you more cantrips (the number increasing with your level) that you just needed a proficiency check for (that check wasn't necessary after like 8th level). So it wasn't the same as 2E's idea of a useful spell or a cantrip, or 1E's idea of a useful spell or 4 cantrips.
Hmm...I dont recall that. In 1E Unearthed Arcana, they described cantrips as 0 level spells such as fire finger, flavor, sour, tie, untie, knot, color, etc... They broke them down into several categories such as "useful, reversed, legerdemain, haunting, etc."
This was the same version that Dragon Magazine described in their volumes #59 and 60.
As I recall, though, 1E spellslingers didn't have any 0-level slots. So they had to sacrifice a 1st-level slot to have some 0-level slots.
Admittedly, though, it's been a long time since I've looked thru those books. I used to have all of the 1E and 2E hardcovers, but I've not yet gotten around to replacing them. |
| Fizilbert |
Posted - 24 Jan 2010 : 12:36:59
quote:
As I recall, the 1E idea of cantrips was that you used four cantrips in place of a single 1st-level spell. The proficiency idea gave you more cantrips (the number increasing with your level) that you just needed a proficiency check for (that check wasn't necessary after like 8th level). So it wasn't the same as 2E's idea of a useful spell or a cantrip, or 1E's idea of a useful spell or 4 cantrips.
Hmm...I dont recall that. In 1E Unearthed Arcana, they described cantrips as 0 level spells such as fire finger, flavor, sour, tie, untie, knot, color, etc... They broke them down into several categories such as "useful, reversed, legerdemain, haunting, etc."
This was the same version that Dragon Magazine described in their volumes #59 and 60. |
| Penknight |
Posted - 24 Jan 2010 : 09:55:20
quote:
Originally posted by Arzakon
I hate to ask... but I'm really curious about this. What is and where do I find that "pathfinder" wizard?
Here's the link for the Pathfinder Wizard. And as I'm posting this, we're having a set of thunderstorms that are hitting my area. I'll try and get back to this tomorrow.  |
| Diffan |
Posted - 24 Jan 2010 : 09:38:12
quote:
Originally posted by Penknight
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Not *just* to echo Ashe here, but in Pathfinder, you prepare a number of cantrips per day, which don't get expended when you use them. So basically, pick your favorite 4-6 and they become unlimited at-will abilities.
Cheers
That's true, and Pathfinder also made a few more nice additions as well as rectifying some problems that many had with some classes and prestige classes. There's a link in my signature that will help out a lot if you're interested in the Pathfinder wizard and sorcerer. By the way, the way Pathfinder fixed the polymorph spell is perfect. 
I gotta agree, the fact that cantrips/orisons are now at-will spells make them so much more useful. I also made it so 0-lvl spells that deal damage like acid splash and electric jolt deal max damage. I mean, I honestly don't think 3 damage is all that game breaking even at level 1.
BTW, how did Paizo change the Polymorph spell? |
| Arzakon |
Posted - 24 Jan 2010 : 09:22:43
I hate to ask... but I'm really curious about this. What is and where do I find that "pathfinder" wizard? |
| Penknight |
Posted - 24 Jan 2010 : 06:13:54
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Not *just* to echo Ashe here, but in Pathfinder, you prepare a number of cantrips per day, which don't get expended when you use them. So basically, pick your favorite 4-6 and they become unlimited at-will abilities.
Cheers
That's true, and Pathfinder also made a few more nice additions as well as rectifying some problems that many had with some classes and prestige classes. There's a link in my signature that will help out a lot if you're interested in the Pathfinder wizard and sorcerer. By the way, the way Pathfinder fixed the polymorph spell is perfect. |
| Erik Scott de Bie |
Posted - 24 Jan 2010 : 05:41:19
Not *just* to echo Ashe here, but in Pathfinder, you prepare a number of cantrips per day, which don't get expended when you use them. So basically, pick your favorite 4-6 and they become unlimited at-will abilities.
Cheers |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 24 Jan 2010 : 04:14:14
quote:
Originally posted by Fizilbert
1E had a fairly good set of cantrip spells. Most of them had similar effects to what you just described; flavoring food, souring food, tie, untie, flame finger, mend, etc...
I actually used those for my 2E character.
quote:
Originally posted by Fizilbert
When 2E came out they got rid of cantrips, except for the 1st level cantrip spell, which was just lame really. Then Dragon Mag re-hashed the idea of cantrips by bring out what was essentially the same thing that 1E had.
As I recall, the 1E idea of cantrips was that you used four cantrips in place of a single 1st-level spell. The proficiency idea gave you more cantrips (the number increasing with your level) that you just needed a proficiency check for (that check wasn't necessary after like 8th level). So it wasn't the same as 2E's idea of a useful spell or a cantrip, or 1E's idea of a useful spell or 4 cantrips.
quote:
Originally posted by Fizilbert
I dont like what they did with cantrips in 3E though. To me it seems like they ignored the cantrips that 1E had, and instead shifted some spells that use to be 1st level in the prior editions down to cantrip level in 3E, such as light and detect magic.
I can see making things like light and detect magic easier to use, because at low levels, most mages wouldn't bother with them. That said, I don't know that going the cantrip route was the right one, either. Perhaps something in the middle, with it being a class ability requiring a skill check... |
| Fizilbert |
Posted - 23 Jan 2010 : 22:39:53
1E had a fairly good set of cantrip spells. Most of them had similar effects to what you just described; flavoring food, souring food, tie, untie, flame finger, mend, etc...
When 2E came out they got rid of cantrips, except for the 1st level cantrip spell, which was just lame really. Then Dragon Mag re-hashed the idea of cantrips by bring out what was essentially the same thing that 1E had.
I dont like what they did with cantrips in 3E though. To me it seems like they ignored the cantrips that 1E had, and instead shifted some spells that use to be 1st level in the prior editions down to cantrip level in 3E, such as light and detect magic. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 23 Jan 2010 : 14:28:47
quote:
Originally posted by Fizilbert
Hell, it wasn't until 3rd Edition that the idea of cantrips became main stream. Maybe they thought the idea of cantrips was a bonus unto itself.
I still haven't seen any edition handle them in a way that matches the flavor of them. The closest I saw was an article in Dragon, making cantrips a proficiency (this was 2E, obviously). I loved the idea and sold my DM on it, and played a half-elf fighter-mage aristocrat (a kit from another issue of Dragon), and with it being a proficiency, he made heavy use of cantrips -- adding flavor to food, drying his clothes, repairing small rips in his clothes, starting the campfire, shaving, dropping a layer of dust in an area to see if there was anything invisible, etc. |
| Fizilbert |
Posted - 23 Jan 2010 : 13:17:04
Hell, it wasn't until 3rd Edition that the idea of cantrips became main stream. Maybe they thought the idea of cantrips was a bonus unto itself. |
| Wenin |
Posted - 23 Jan 2010 : 04:58:07
I completely accept that I can house rule bonus lvl 0 spells, as such an idea is kinda a no brainer to me. I'm just perplexed as to why the system wasn't designed that way. They must have had a reason behind doing so.
It is such an obvious inconsistency. =)
I'm assuming they had a good reason, so I'm interested in hearing it. |
| woodwwad |
Posted - 21 Jan 2010 : 19:05:34
I've wondered why they didn't put 0 level spells in for bonus spell levels either. Doesn't seem there is any good reason not too. And some 0 level spells stay relivent for the whole game. |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 21 Jan 2010 : 18:29:00
quote:
Originally posted by Alisttair
Just make them unlimited use spells (maybe with a feat). Itll make lower levels more enjoyable (and its nothing game breaking at high levels).
*cough*Pathfinder*cough* |
| Alisttair |
Posted - 21 Jan 2010 : 18:25:54
Just make them unlimited use spells (maybe with a feat). Itll make lower levels more enjoyable (and its nothing game breaking at high levels). |
| Fizilbert |
Posted - 21 Jan 2010 : 12:47:31
You can always allow bonus spells in your campaign, even if it might not be in the rules.
I've been doing that for a while now in my 2E campaign. They never made a rule for magic bonus spells for a high INT in 2E, but I just decided that in my game I would allow them. And I STILL have a 1st level mage who is complaining that 2 spells a day isn't enough. HAHA I told him he was lucky, under standard rules he'd have just 1. |
|
|
