| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Beirnadri Magranth |
Posted - 03 Oct 2005 : 20:18:14
I am about to start a campaign where at least one of the player is a wizard who starts out from Candlekeep. My friend is running this campaign so I am not the dm. I was wondering though, how many spells do you think my wizard character should have at 1st level.
my wizard is a diviner, with 17 int. (+3bonus). so he should have 6 1st level spells
i dont really care about 0th level spells and the amount of those but, i think i should have more than six spells known because
1- i was raised in Candlekeep, the center for knowledge
2- am very intelligent, and therefore I am a quick learner
3-i have a 15 charisma so I'm very personable and hopefully have made friends with wiser sages and wizards who I was able to persuade them to teach me the ropes
the spells I have so far in my spell book are:
know protections, (from Magic of Faerun)
arcane sensitivity, (from Shining South)
locate city, (from Races of Destiny)
scholar's touch, (from Races of Destiny)
low light vision (from Magic of Faerun)
Detect Secret Doors (PHB)
I think I should know more spells that that because those spells are useless in combat mostly, and I dont have offensive spells or anything like that. It makes sense to me that since I am undertaking a quest for a lost kingdom, and recording what I find for candlekeep, that someone taught me a couple extra self defense spells like
True Strike (divination which is my specialty),
Expeditious retreat (since I'm journeyiong far)
Obscuring mist (an interesting defensive spell)
and/or maybe magic missile (since it would be the only real offensive spell I know).
The spells I currently know fit in with my character background, so I really dont want to give them up. Also I can't afford to purchase even the low-level scrolls to learn these new spells since I spent it on a donkey who carries my journal equipment, spellbook, clothes, food and other gear, like candles. I even had to give up having a longsword (which i took martial weapon proficiency since I dont have very many offensive spells...)
I don't feel like Im "red-maging" (powergaming) here and would appreciate any advice on whether it is really acceptable for me to add a couple more spells to my book and how many would be acceptable.
Lastly, my DM supports this but he and I both don't know how many more spells is too much.
Thanks in advance!  |
| 5 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Beirnadri Magranth |
Posted - 05 Oct 2005 : 00:18:05
thanks for the replies, I was extensivley reading the rule books, and the problem with learning more spells is that it costs 100gp per page to copy a spell into your spellbook. !!
the ones that dont cost money to copy into your spellbook is one that you learn by experience.... so in Complete Arcane there are two feats in the section about arcane organizations, one allows you to learn more spells through experience by growing up in a collegiate atmosphere.... which candlekeep definately is!
tylerxkj said "Part of being a diviner is to learn what is going to happen..and how to deal with it. If you build an invincible castle, but have no army to hold it, you've sealed your own fait. You shouldn't get bonus spells because you choose ones that don't provide an obvious bonus.
If you have a strong party that can handle enemies and put the knowledege you've gained for them to good use then by all means keep your spell selection. Just make sure that the DM knows you aren't a combat powerhouse."
and i totally agree that diviners are amazing and can gain lost lore etc. which is important but only two wizards meet at candlekeep and then the rest of the party meets in beregost or somewhere. the other wizard is an abjurer and doesnt have any offensive spell either, (he excluded enchantment Thelonius) so we wouldn't really survive the travel without the an offensive spell.
but I solved my problem by taking Collegiate Wizard, in place of Disciplined (+1 will +2 conc.
|
| Kentinal |
Posted - 05 Oct 2005 : 00:08:03
Was passing by this for a time without coment.
As for spells in spell book, last time I cheched, you can have as many as your level permits you to learn based on caster level.
" A wizard can also add a spell to her book whenever she encounters one on a magic scroll or in another wizard’s spellbook. No matter what the spell’s source, the wizard must first decipher the magical writing (see Arcane Magical Writings, above). Next, she must spend a day studying the spell. At the end of the day, she must make a Spellcraft check (DC 15 + spell’s level). A wizard who has specialized in a school of spells gains a +2 bonus on the Spellcraft check if the new spell is from her specialty school. She cannot, however, learn any spells from her prohibited schools. If the check succeeds, the wizard understands the spell and can copy it into her spellbook (see Writing a New Spell into a Spellbook, below). The process leaves a spellbook that was copied from unharmed, but a spell successfully copied from a magic scroll disappears from the parchment. "
Candlekeep as a major source of store lore certainly would have spellbooks to study from. The only limits I would see from having the entire list of spells level quailfied for would be keepers restricting study of some books and the amunt of time to learn the spells well enough to enter into spellbook. |
| TylerXKJ |
Posted - 04 Oct 2005 : 23:47:14
Part of being a diviner is to learn what is going to happen..and how to deal with it. If you build an invincible castle, but have no army to hold it, you've sealed your own fait. You shouldn't get bonus spells because you choose ones that don't provide an obvious bonus.
If you have a strong party that can handle enemies and put the knowledege you've gained for them to good use then by all means keep your spell selection. Just make sure that the DM knows you aren't a combat powerhouse. |
| Kianna |
Posted - 04 Oct 2005 : 14:11:27
As long as you aren't casting more than your alotted per day I don't see the harm in having a few extras in your spellbook, especially if the DM is ok with it.
I am a particularly nice DM in that if you can reason it to me I'll usually let you have it. If you abuse it then I taketh away... or something like that. :) |
| Thelonius |
Posted - 03 Oct 2005 : 20:43:09
It depends of the degree of realism you want to add to the game. If you want to base your char in the rules, then, you can't use more spells or you should change the ones you know. But the explanation you gave about the char seems suitable to me, so it could be funnier if you add a couple more of spells, just as "magic missile" as you said, and maybe a more defensive one just as the "shield", or the "armor" spells, of course you can avoid using those dependig of the dexterity and the constitution of the starring, changing the defensive one by a hindering spell just as "charm person" or "blind". |
|
|
