| Author |
 Topic  |
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11829 Posts |
 Posted - 12 Jul 2006 : 14:27:46
|
I'm starting to see a trend that I had started to see in the latter years of 2nd edition. I'm beginning to see spells which are of what I would consider poor design, as if the editors were so busy trying to get material out that some things slipped through the cracks. The issue had gotten so bad in 2nd edition that my alternative was that I finally just started embracing it all. The campaign became very magic centric after that.
Don't get me wrong, the stuff WotC puts out as spells when 3E first came out were extremely balanced (especially compared to those put out by third party competitors), but recent trends are making me less likely to allow players to use whatever they find in a book (it was nice there for a while). I find these types of things with certain authors in particular (for instance, I've found a tendency for Bruce Cordell to write spell concepts up for what they do, but then he uses a different bonus than what would be implied by the concept... for instance stating that someone gives someone a glimpse of the future but having it give the person a competence bonus instead of an insight bonus, because there's few spells of said level giving the competence bonus)
This came up recently when one of my player's came up to me with a spell from Frostburn that didn't require a save and drained 3d6 dex with a touch attack (I believe the spell was 4th lvl and named shivering touch). Of course, quicken said spell and attack with a dexterity dmg'ing poisoned weapon and you are likely to drop many a beastie. There were a few others as well, which I feel after reading them I need to do research on before outright banning them (I have a conspirator's mind when it comes to spell combos, so sometimes I see some very nasty things that aren't readily apparent to others). For example, another was the bloodstar spell which dropped a person's con by 1 each time they are hit (fort save allowed). Now, this doesn't sound too bad until you have the person dual-wielding a pair of wounding short swords with con-damaging poison on them, oh and throw in the haste spell just for good measure.
This all being said, the reason why I wrote this thread is I don't have a ton of time to review through books to make a listing of banned spells. I also understand that some people may see no problem with X spell and would allow it in their campaign. I don't want this thread to turn into that kind of discussion, as it tends to turn ugly. What I would like to know is if there is any specific spell that you ban from your campaign, and why you ban it (briefly). In this way, perhaps together we can make a listing.
|
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
Dargoth
Great Reader
Australia
4607 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2006 : 14:50:06
|
I have more or less banned all spells that arent in the PHB or a source book with an FR logo on it.
If a player wants to use a spell outside that list then they have to either research it themselves or find someone whose willing to sell it to them.
This was done for 2 reasons
1) Some of the newer spells are unbalanced
2) Some of my players where spending 45 minutes to an hour and half choosing their spells due to the number of books they have access to |
“I am the King of Rome, and above grammar”
Emperor Sigismund
"Its good to be the King!"
Mel Brooks |
 |
|
|
Wandering_mage
Senior Scribe
688 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2006 : 16:13:38
|
I favor the PHB spells and the FR sourcebook (Magic of Faerun rocks!)spells due to the flavor and history behind each spell. The Spell Compendium is awesome but it does have some crazy spells as do some of the standard DnD books. I am going to run my next game using FR books and DMHB and PHB only. That way every character has the flavor befitting the realms and their spells are of an explained nature. When my player used avasculate for the first time I just wanted to be like, "How do you know that spell? And why?" I also think that the cool spell that uses every enchantment your enemy has active on his person to harm him is totally a signature spell of an abjurer of some type. Not some caddy spell to be picked by anybody. With an Elven mage I just put together I am using only magic that I have read of elves using. This allows me to interact with other mages of different races to get spells of an unelf-like nature. Thus an explained route of spell aquisition. I favor the mage class and thus I am ever so careful with my structuring of my mages. I am open to the Spell Compedium being used as long as I have read through the spell and it matches the character or the player found it in game fair and square.  |
Illum
The Wandering Mage |
|
|
|
Kalin Agrivar
Senior Scribe
Canada
956 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2006 : 16:24:17
|
when I DM I have almost 100% control over what spells the player wizards receive, as I believe a wizard's master gives them their first spellbook then what ever spells the wizard finds in the campaign are also determined by the DM. Only "leveling up" bonus spells learnt are out of my control...
as for sorcerers the players I have seen usually take the same old spells from the PH 
I don't disallow a spell from any source as long as the players know they will face that kind of spell from their enemies...I have felt players are less likely to milk the rules when they know the DM will (unbiasly) do the same for their foes
  |
Kalin Xorell El'Agrivar
- High Mage of the Arcane Assembly
- Lore Keeper of the Vault of Ancestors
- 3rd Son of the Lord of the Stand |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36804 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2006 : 17:26:22
|
The old FRA had a section that broke up spell lists into common, uncommon, and rare sections. I wish they still did something like that for spells. Actually having a frequency listing would make it easier for DMs to regulate certain spells, and it would add flavor to campaigns, too, I think. (PC: "I want to learn Bigby's Crushing Tactical Nuke." DM: "That's a rare spell. Make a DC25 Spellcraft check to see if you've even heard of it, and another to have a rough idea of what it does.")
Your PC wizard may love the niftiness of a tome full of spells he doesn't know, but I think he'd treasure it more if he knew that the spell on page 13 wasn't well-known outside of the Underdark, or that the spell on page 36 was virtually unknown outside of Mulhorand... |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 12 Jul 2006 17:30:52 |
|
|
|
Kajehase
Great Reader
Sweden
2104 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2006 : 20:52:15
|
One thing I've been doing in anticipation of ever running a game is taking the spells appearing outside the PHB and alloting them to various organisations/regions. So a spellcaster from Calimshan may well know of most the spells in Sandstorm, but none or very few of the ones in Frostburn, for example.
Hmm...guess I'm just playing a different riff of the tune Wooly was singing just above me... |
There is a rumour going around that I have found god. I think is unlikely because I have enough difficulty finding my keys, and there is empirical evidence that they exist.
Terry Pratchett |
|
|
|
Wandering_mage
Senior Scribe
688 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2006 : 21:10:16
|
Wooly, that is a fantastic idea! I shall make an excel or word document with all the spells in all the books I have. It should take a while but hey why not. Or we could all pick a book to go through and compile the results at the end. Any takers?
Kajehase, I like your thinking very much. I think you have displayed the basic reasoning behind my beginning post by showing what a wizard from Calisham would easily know and rarely know. You just said it better. |
Illum
The Wandering Mage |
|
|
|
Ergdusch
Master of Realmslore
Germany
1720 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2006 : 21:46:05
|
I only allow spells from PHB and the FRCS as free options to choose from. Spells from the regional source books and the MoF are limited and only introduced to the game by me because I think they are somewhat "exclusive" to the regions. Of course now and then somebody travels far and wide and shares the spells but that makes i.e. a spell from Rashemen a rare sight in Amn.......... I guess we are back to the common, uncommon and rare thing again....
On thing I figured out though - spells from the school of illusion of level 7 and higher are very limited! Too limited to make an Illusionist happy! |
"Das Gras weht im Wind, wenn der Wind weht." |
Edited by - Ergdusch on 12 Jul 2006 21:49:37 |
|
|
|
George Krashos
Master of Realmslore
Australia
6666 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2006 : 00:48:03
|
My understanding with 3E is that for wizards, you automatically gain a number of spells when you rise a level. Sorcerers also, but obviously in a different way.
My take if I was a DM would be to vet the spell choices for the sorcerer (they gain theirs not through study so the DM has the final say whether they gain a particular spell) and indirectly control what spells the wizards get. I say indirectly on the basis that I'd follow the old 1E and 2E model where the wizard had to find new spells from scrolls, spellbooks or research before he/she could put them in their book. Of the last research option, I'd say it would be limited to spells they could find in old lore tomes or through attending such places as Candlekeep, the Vault of Sages, etc. (again, allowing the DM to control what they 'find'), and in respect of the first two, it's what treasure they can glean off their conquered opponents.
But then again, that's probably why I don't play and certainly don't DM.
-- George Krashos
|
"Because only we, contrary to the barbarians, never count the enemy in battle." -- Aeschylus |
Edited by - George Krashos on 13 Jul 2006 00:48:35 |
|
|
|
GothicDan
Master of Realmslore
USA
1103 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2006 : 01:04:15
|
| I wouldn't mind if you were my DM, George. That's exactly how I'd like a DM to guide a Wizard I played. I'm very much a fan of in-game spell research, discovery, etc. |
Planescape Fanatic
"Fiends and Undead are the peanut butter and jelly of evil." - Me
"That attitude should be stomped on, whenever and wherever it's encountered, because it makes people holding such views bad citizens, not just bad roleplayers (considering D&D was structured as a 'forced cooperation' game, and although successive editions are pointing it more and more towards a me-first, min-max game, the drift away from 'we all need each other to succeed' will at some point make it 'no longer' D&D)." - ED GREENWOOD |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36804 Posts |
|
|
Kuje
Great Reader
USA
7915 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2006 : 02:21:02
|
Ditto,
And that's still mostly what I use. |
For some of us, books are as important as almost anything else on earth. What a miracle it is that out of these small, flat, rigid squares of paper unfolds world after world, worlds that sing to you, comfort and quiet and excite you... Books are full of the things that you don't get in real life - wonderful, lyrical language, for instance, right off the bat. - Anne Lamott, Bird by Bird
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium |
|
|
|
KnightErrantJR
Great Reader
USA
5402 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2006 : 02:26:00
|
In my campaign, unless the PCs go to a wizard mentor or to a school, such as in Silverymoon, the only spells they have "open access" to are the spells in the PH. I figure that they are the spells that are fairly well known for any wizard that has been trained by a wizard at least somewhat familiar with adventuring. So they would at least have notes of such spells.
Even clerical spells I limit to the spells in the PH unless the cleric in question learns certain spells from specific orders that might learn more specialized prayers. Although I have one exception, in that Revivification is considered a common clerical spell in my campaigns. I picture that one being used more often than Raise Dead . . .
Of course, I still require training before gaining a level, so spells still are usually learned from a higher level wizard anyway.
I also make wizards practice any shape they want to use with shapechanging spells, and I make them practice summoning creatures before they try to summon them in combat as well. Each time they practice a new form, they can shift into it on the fly later, and every time the successfully summon something, they can summon it on the fly when they cast the spell in combat.
|
|
|
|
Purple Dragon Knight
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1796 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2006 : 03:09:41
|
No offense guys, but the reality of the Dungeon and Dragons game is that if you start restricting which spells your players can or can't learn, they'll think, on some level, that you're being a jerk.
The only ones that are crystal clear forbidden IMC are Elminster's this and the Simbul's that, because it has an 'in-game' substantiation for exclusion (they're these wizard's 'secret' spells...) Even then, if one of my players would make a clear request that they would like one of these spells, I'd drop it in some wyrm's hoard a few levels later, after the player has gone on with his life and the understanding that it's not a sure bet...
My recommendation, and I've learned this the hard way at times in the various games I've run since 1988: DMs, do your job. No more, no less. Focus on preparing a good story, good adventure design and make sure each player gets the spotlight once or twice in their character's existence. |
|
|
|
GothicDan
Master of Realmslore
USA
1103 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2006 : 03:17:43
|
Call me a jerk, then. There's a reason why there are campaign settings and not just generic adventures - it's because some people enjoy applying the culture, history, magic, etc., of the world to their games. :)
The few times I DMed in my custom world, my players appreciated the depth I put into it, and they liked the fact that the way I DMed reflected it. |
Planescape Fanatic
"Fiends and Undead are the peanut butter and jelly of evil." - Me
"That attitude should be stomped on, whenever and wherever it's encountered, because it makes people holding such views bad citizens, not just bad roleplayers (considering D&D was structured as a 'forced cooperation' game, and although successive editions are pointing it more and more towards a me-first, min-max game, the drift away from 'we all need each other to succeed' will at some point make it 'no longer' D&D)." - ED GREENWOOD |
Edited by - GothicDan on 13 Jul 2006 03:18:50 |
|
|
|
KnightErrantJR
Great Reader
USA
5402 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2006 : 04:30:26
|
Yeah, gotta go with Dan on this one. Now, I can see calling me a jerk if I told them they couldn't find any third level spells once they were high enough level to cast them, or telling that that can't find spells for their character in their specialty school if they are a specialist, but on the other hand, if they demand that their character learn Goblinfryer from Races of the Superfluous a week after the book comes out before I can even read it myself, he is in for a rude awakening. It amazed me how many people I saw on various boards immediately assume that their character was going to have access to everything in the Spell Compendium when it came out. I always figured DM restriction of spells was part of game balance myself.
Now, I'm not a complete ogre. If a player says that the new spell they just read about would be great for the type of spell they want their character to cast, if it makes sense as a utility kind of spell, I'll let them spend the time and money to research it, or maybe I'll let slip that that crazy hermit just outside of the farmlands that everyone avoids, might just have been a wizard in his youth, and rumor has it he used that type of spell.
Of course, then they find out that he was a Red Wizard, and that he is a renegade from them, and they may end up protecting him from his former collegues as well as a Halruaan that he ticked off in his youth as well.
Even using the "if its in an FR book it should be in a FR campaign" logic though, why would a spell attributed to, say, Halruuans, that are very insular and reticent to share their magic, be something that should appear in a mage's spellbook in the Dalelands, for example?
On the other hand, my friend, when he DMs, does a lot of streamlining. He doesn't really care too much about fine details, like where you learn a spell or get training for a PrC, as he is more focused on running cool dungeons, and seeing if we can use our class abilities to overcome some of the monsters and traps he comes up with. Its a fun campaign, but a different style then the way I run. So, long story short, everyone has to DM the way they are comfortable, and hopefully you can find players that work with your mindset. |
|
|
|
Sanishiver
Senior Scribe
USA
476 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2006 : 06:11:06
|
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
I don't want this thread to turn into that kind of discussion, as it tends to turn ugly. What I would like to know is if there is any specific spell that you ban from your campaign, and why you ban it (briefly). In this way, perhaps together we can make a listing.
An On Topic Response:
I run a 3.5 Realms campaign. I do not as of this writing ban any specific spell from my campaign.
However, my house rules and DM Caveat still stand firm: ANY spell not in the PHB requires my approval before a PC may research it or add it to their spell list upon gaining a level. This goes for both Divine and Arcane magic, as well as Psionics.
I have introduced several spells from Third Party sources (such as Rapid Journey from Relics and Rituals). These spells have only served to enhance my campaign, and make excellent treasure finds.
Lastly I have run into headaches with 3.0 spells (Haste and Harm) and really had to work to keep play balanced with 3.5 Shapechange and the various Word spells (Holy Word, Blasphemy, Word of Chaos, etc...).
J. Grenemyer |
09/20/2008: Tiger Army at the Catalyst in Santa Cruz. You wouldn’t believe how many females rode it out in the pit. Santa Cruz women are all of them beautiful. Now I know to add tough to that description.
6/27/2008: WALL-E is about the best damn movie Pixar has ever made. It had my heart racing and had me rooting for the good guy.
9/9/2006: Dave Mathews Band was off the hook at the Shoreline Amphitheater.
Never, ever read the game books too literally, or make such assumptions that what is omitted cannot be. Bad DM form, that.
And no matter how compelling a picture string theory paints, if it does not accurately describe our universe, it will be no more relevant than an elaborate game of Dungeons and Dragons. --paragraph 1, chapter 9, The Elegant Universe by Brian Greene |
Edited by - Sanishiver on 13 Jul 2006 06:14:29 |
|
|
|
KnightErrantJR
Great Reader
USA
5402 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2006 : 06:13:44
|
| Sanshiver, thanks for reminding me . . . Sleyvas, watch out for Power Word: Pain from Races of the Dragon . . . WAY too overpowered for a 1st level spell. |
|
|
|
Kuje
Great Reader
USA
7915 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2006 : 06:16:05
|
quote:
Originally posted by KnightErrantJR
Sanshiver, thanks for reminding me . . . Sleyvas, watch out for Power Word: Pain from Races of the Dragon . . . WAY too overpowered for a 1st level spell.
That is banned in my games and I'm a DM that doesn't worry about balance that much, that is how bad that spell is. :) |
For some of us, books are as important as almost anything else on earth. What a miracle it is that out of these small, flat, rigid squares of paper unfolds world after world, worlds that sing to you, comfort and quiet and excite you... Books are full of the things that you don't get in real life - wonderful, lyrical language, for instance, right off the bat. - Anne Lamott, Bird by Bird
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31774 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2006 : 06:37:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
My understanding with 3E is that for wizards, you automatically gain a number of spells when you rise a level. Sorcerers also, but obviously in a different way.
My take if I was a DM would be to vet the spell choices for the sorcerer (they gain theirs not through study so the DM has the final say whether they gain a particular spell) and indirectly control what spells the wizards get. I say indirectly on the basis that I'd follow the old 1E and 2E model where the wizard had to find new spells from scrolls, spellbooks or research before he/she could put them in their book. Of the last research option, I'd say it would be limited to spells they could find in old lore tomes or through attending such places as Candlekeep, the Vault of Sages, etc. (again, allowing the DM to control what they 'find'), and in respect of the first two, it's what treasure they can glean off their conquered opponents.
But then again, that's probably why I don't play and certainly don't DM.
-- George Krashos
It's always worked for me.
Plus, you always have the opportunity of making the discovery of new and interesting spells a special part of an adventure -- especially for the Wizard PC.
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Ergdusch
Master of Realmslore
Germany
1720 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2006 : 09:04:19
|
IMO restricting some spells (from special sources i.e.) is fine - but watching over every single spell a player might get... I don't know, guys?! Where is the fun in playing a wizard when you have no say in what spells you may cast! It's like telling the fighter which feats to pic, the rogue which skills to focus on and the cleric which God to worship!
If it works for you and your players - fine. However, it's just not how I see the game.
|
"Das Gras weht im Wind, wenn der Wind weht." |
|
|
|
Jorkens
Great Reader
Norway
2950 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2006 : 09:42:01
|
It seems I am a Jerk to. To me the spells available must in some way match the feel of the campaign and the general playing style. To me some spells can be disruptive to a story and I will try to limit their use in that adventure or that campaign. Some Divination spells can be a real pain in a murder mystery. The spells are a part of the character in many ways and I will try to give out spells that match the character.
Now, if a player wished to play a character that was able to cast certain types of magic I would build a campaign around this, but I would be very careful with which spells became available. i have not had any complaints yet from players on this, as they know I will try my best if they let me know early on which direction they want the character to evolve. Now, if the character changed dramatically as a result of the adventure it is only natural that it would take some time to change the spells used also, so time will then solve the problem. |
|
|
|
Ergdusch
Master of Realmslore
Germany
1720 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2006 : 10:25:05
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
To me the spells available must in some way match the feel of the campaign and the general playing style. To me some spells can be disruptive to a story and I will try to limit their use in that adventure or that campaign. Some Divination spells can be a real pain in a murder mystery.
Good point there!
I recognize the spoiling effect that some spells (i.e. Find the Path, Commune, Discern location) might have on a certain adventure. However, I see it as an option for the players to use those spells and as a challage for me the DM to still make the (apparently easy) adventure a memorable tale. Matter of fact I have disigned adventures where the easiest/fastest solution was to use divination magic. The players did not even considered that...
|
"Das Gras weht im Wind, wenn der Wind weht." |
|
|
|
Wandering_mage
Senior Scribe
688 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2006 : 13:24:29
|
I'm not too "balanced" aware myself. I just think the stressing of cultural flavor and wizard type should be reflected by the spells chosen. Of course Diversity is needed to be a good mage but having a preference towards fire spells or something like that gives a signature feel to your wizard. It's like what you choose to carry as magical items and who your familiar is. Spells say a lot about you. If you are big into evocation you might be considered destructive and overbearing by fellow wizards. Know what I mean? As to cramping a wizard players style with spell selection I think a balance can be attained with no discomfort between both the DM and player. You just need to be understanding of why each party wants this spell or doesn't want you to have that spell. When my DM says no I immediately let the subject drop and let things play out. Usually I find that there was a purpose as do my players when I DM. If no purpose is evident ask the DM later.  |
Illum
The Wandering Mage |
|
|
|
Kuje
Great Reader
USA
7915 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2006 : 18:23:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ergdusch
IMO restricting some spells (from special sources i.e.) is fine - but watching over every single spell a player might get... I don't know, guys?! Where is the fun in playing a wizard when you have no say in what spells you may cast! It's like telling the fighter which feats to pic, the rogue which skills to focus on and the cleric which God to worship!
If it works for you and your players - fine. However, it's just not how I see the game.
I do this for divine caster PC's at times as a DM because I use the lore for FR about divine casters. I.E. Sometimes the deities just don't want that divine caster to have that spell and the deity wants the divine caster to have this one instead for a specific reason. Or sometimes they even give the divine caster an extra spell.
And as the others have said, there are times PC arcane casters don't get the spells they are after. The NPC might not know that spell, might not be willing to trade for it, might have different spells, might never even have heard of such a spell, etc. Some arcane caster, or divine caster for that matter for divine spellbooks/scrolls, had to be the one to write those spells into spellbooks/scrolls, using thier time, energy, materials, etc.
I've already told my current email game wizards that they can only choose spells from the phb, frcs, and Magic of Faerun. Anything else we'll discuss it or I'll think about it. And this is even more of a issue with cantrips because people argue that that PHB passage of, "A wizard starts with ALL cantrips" means exactly what it says, they can start with ALL cantrips from ALL sourcebooks. Sorry, I don't think so. |
For some of us, books are as important as almost anything else on earth. What a miracle it is that out of these small, flat, rigid squares of paper unfolds world after world, worlds that sing to you, comfort and quiet and excite you... Books are full of the things that you don't get in real life - wonderful, lyrical language, for instance, right off the bat. - Anne Lamott, Bird by Bird
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium |
Edited by - Kuje on 13 Jul 2006 18:26:00 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36804 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2006 : 18:57:34
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kuje
And this is even more of a issue with cantrips because people argue that that PHB passage of, "A wizard starts with ALL cantrips" means exactly what it says, they can start with ALL cantrips from ALL sourcebooks. Sorry, I don't think so.
I don't see cantrips being a problem, even though no edition of D&D has handled cantrips in a way that matched the flavor of cantrips. The best way I've seen yet was a variant idea in Dragon magazine, handling them as a proficiency (this was in 2E). |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Crust
Learned Scribe
USA
273 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2006 : 19:18:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by Purple Dragon Knight
No offense guys, but the reality of the Dungeon and Dragons game is that if you start restricting which spells your players can or can't learn, they'll think, on some level, that you're being a jerk.
I know my players would do this. They'd certainly complain, or give me that cock-eyed look as if I'm up to something. By being overly liberal in banning spells, players might think, "Oh. So it is the DM vs. the players." Not that that always happens, but it is something to be aware of.
I don't normally allow players to freely select specific spells like Blackstaff, Elminster's evasion, or The Simbul's spell trigger (which was nerfed in PGtF, sadly). There would have to be a reason in-game, storywise, for a player to receive those spells.
I've never flat-out banned a spell. Especially at later levels, spellcasters can take whatever spell they want. I did have a small problem with the orb spells from Complete Arcane, especially orb of force, which is basically automatic damage for a PC who can see his/her target. Toss in a couple multispell feats and a sneak, and orb of force becomes an automatic boss-slaying spell. The fact that no save or SR is allowed, it just didn't seem right. All ray spells should allow an SR roll. I've heard that the caster is actually shaping a ball of whatever with the magic, then hurls the orb, at which point the orb is just energy rather than "magic." Eh... 
I let the sorcerer/rogue/arcane trickster take orb of force. He destroyed my 27 CR advanced gelugon in one round: fly out of hiding into range, orb of force -> quickened (arcane prep.) orb of force -> multispell orb of force -> multispell orb of force + impromptu sneak d8 (sacred strike feat from Exalted Deeds). He actually almost killed himself once doing something similar against a necromancer lich warded with spell turning.
I try not to make a habit of banning anything. I constantly remind myself that if the PCs are at a certain level, if they have access to something because of their class levels, feat selection, etc., then they should be able to freely use that spell, feat, whatever it is, and it's my job to bend and flow with that growth. I think that's important. Really, my players are only limited by the limited number of books we possess (and I only recently realized how behind I am on sourcebooks). |
"That's right, hurl back views that force ye to think by name-calling - 'tis the grand old tradition, let it not down! Anything to keep from having to think, or - Mystra forfend - change thy own views!"
Narnra glowered at her father. "Just how am I to learn how to think? By being taught by you?"
"Some folk in the Realms would give their lives for the chance to learn at my feet," Elminster said mildly. "Several already have."
~from Elminster's Daughter, Ed Greenwood |
Edited by - Crust on 13 Jul 2006 19:24:21 |
|
|
|
Ladern
Acolyte
Mexico
14 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2006 : 19:25:40
|
I could say, if there's balance in your game and if your players are mature enough to make sense in the spells they choose, its ok to give them one or two spells that may be unbalanced.
I remember when my elven wizard ask me for a spell (firebrand i thinks) that made fireball damage only in a number of chosen creatures. I think that it was balanced at first, but when i saw a patrol of 10 drows of 4th level in middle of a fight being banquished by a single motion of that wizard hand without scratching his fellow adventurers i drop my jaw.
and there was the cleric that reads every book and tell me if he can cast them cause a cleric "his god grants them".
I find a solution for unbalanced spells, i put them in a "give and take" cattegory when the caster cast the spell, there is a price to it in xp or ability damage that can't be healed by magic, even "special" spell components. This way they can use a powerful spell in the right moment but they will not use it every second.
I also think about restricting spells, not every spell is allowed in my campaing, but if the player whent out his way to find and develop a spell and whent on adventure and troubles to find it he deserves to have a spell that is way better the average for that level. |
If life turns back at you.....
Sneak Attack for extra damage |
|
|
|
Kuje
Great Reader
USA
7915 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2006 : 19:37:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Kuje
And this is even more of a issue with cantrips because people argue that that PHB passage of, "A wizard starts with ALL cantrips" means exactly what it says, they can start with ALL cantrips from ALL sourcebooks. Sorry, I don't think so.
I don't see cantrips being a problem, even though no edition of D&D has handled cantrips in a way that matched the flavor of cantrips. The best way I've seen yet was a variant idea in Dragon magazine, handling them as a proficiency (this was in 2E).
It's an issue for me because there are probably at least a hundred cantrips in sourcebooks to date and I have serious problems about someone knowing all of them. |
For some of us, books are as important as almost anything else on earth. What a miracle it is that out of these small, flat, rigid squares of paper unfolds world after world, worlds that sing to you, comfort and quiet and excite you... Books are full of the things that you don't get in real life - wonderful, lyrical language, for instance, right off the bat. - Anne Lamott, Bird by Bird
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36804 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2006 : 20:38:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kuje
It's an issue for me because there are probably at least a hundred cantrips in sourcebooks to date and I have serious problems about someone knowing all of them.
See, that doesn't bother me, so long as I look at them the way they've always been described in text: minor little magical exercises that do no damage, are often used for training, and can be used for minor things like dusting shelves, drying clothes, mending small tears in cloth, shedding light equal to a candle, etc.
I'd prolly make them a skill, and do it similar to that proficiency article. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 13 Jul 2006 20:40:04 |
|
|
|
KnightErrantJR
Great Reader
USA
5402 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2006 : 20:41:21
|
| I can see where the concept really affects how you perceive knowing "all" cantrips. If you view them as minor magic that any apprentice should be able to do, and so minor that you don't even have to prepare them (i.e. anyone can cast cantrips essentially the way a sorcerer casts more powerful spells), then yeah, they shouldn't be a problem. On the other hand, if they are written out in spell books like other spells . . . then it gets problematic. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Spells in the Realms - possible issues?
