Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Milo HoBo 11-26-06, 08:13 PM	This variant is a book caster. So this is your last chance to turn back. “There’s a clay golem come right at us!” screamed the Harry the rogue. “Do something about it!” The Mage looks over his glasses and says, "I will, but let me look something up first.” This post is always the most up to date version of this class. The Mage http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/ca_gallery/85475.jpg Table 1-1: The Mage Base Fort Ref Will Perfected Level Attack Bonus Save Save Save Spells Special 1st +0 +0 +0 +2 1 Specialization, Scribe Scroll 2nd +1 +0 +0 +3 2 3rd +1 +1 +1 +3 2 Recognize Perfection 4th +2 +1 +1 +4 3 5th +2 +1 +1 +4 3 Better than Perfect +1 6th +3 +2 +2 +5 4 7th +3 +2 +2 +5 4 Pefectly Silent 8th +4 +2 +2 +6 5 9th +4 +3 +3 +6 5 10th +5 +3 +3 +7 6 Bonus Feat 11th +5 +3 +3 +7 6 12th +6/+1 +4 +4 +8 7 13th +6/+1 +4 +4 +8 7 Perfectly Still 14th +7/+2 +4 +4 +9 8 15th +7/+2 +5 +5 +9 8 Better than Perfect +2 16th +8/+3 +5 +5 +10 9 17th +8/+3 +5 +5 +10 9 18th +9/+4 +6 +6 +11 10 Perfect Resilience 19th +9/+4 +6 +6 +11 10 20th +10/+5 +6 +6 +12 11 Embodiment of Perfection Weapon and Armor Proficiency Mages are proficient with the club, dagger, heavy crossbow, light crossbow, and quarterstaff, but not with any type of armor or shield. Armor of any type interferes with a Mage’s movements, which can cause her spells with somatic components to fail. Specialization A Mage must choose a school of specialization. Instead of a Wizard's normal benefits from specialization a Mage only receives Perfected Spells. However, she must still give up two different schools. Divination and Abjuration may be treated as one school for the purposes of schools of specialization. Spells A Mage casts arcane spells which are drawn from the Wizard list. A Mage need not choose and prepare her spells ahead of time. Instead, she can form in her mind any spell she has recorded in her spellbook (and actually has trouble preparing spells ahead of time, see below). To learn, form, or cast a spell, the Mage must have an Intelligence score equal to at least 10 + the spell level. The Difficulty Class for a saving throw against a Mage’s spell is 10 + the spell level + the Mage’s Intelligence modifier. Forming a spell requires a full-round action to concentrate on the spell which provokes an attack of opportunity. This attack of opportunity may be avoided by making a concentration check equal to 15 + the spell level of the spell being formed. In order to form a spell the Mage must (usually) be viewing a scribed version of the spell in a spellbook or scroll. If she is successful in forming the spell, it forms in the Mage's mind at the end of her full-round action and can be cast (requiring a standard, swift, immediate, etc. action) at it's normal casting time when you have the next available action; at this point the spell slot is deducted from her total. If the Mage does not cast the readied spell within a number of minutes equal to her level, it fades from her mind as if cast. Like other spellcasters, a Mage can cast only a certain number of spells of each spell level per day. Her base daily spell allotment is given on Tables 1-2. In addition, she receives bonus spells per day if she has a high Intelligence score. Mages might be more flexible, but they haven't exercised their mind in the same way as Wizards of the same level. Like a Wizard, a Mage may know any number of spells as kept by there spellbook. Each day, a Mage must focus her mind on the task of casting her spells. A Mage needs 8 hours of rest (just like a Wizard), after which she spends 15 minutes concentrating. During this period, the Mage readies her mind to cast her daily allotment of spells. This also allows herself to be in tune with magic in the same manner that Sorcerers exist naturally so as to remove the bulk of the process of preparation. Without such a period to refresh herself, the Mage does not regain the spell slots she used up the day before. Perfected Spells A Mage also has the ability to master a small number of spells as she advances, which must be drawn from her school of specialization and be spells that she has studied extensively enough to have written them in her spellbook. When casting these spells, she need not spend a full-round action to form the spell in her mind, and also does not require access to a scribed version of the spell. These spells are so familiar to her that she can cast them at their normal casting time. She gains Perfected Spell as shown in the Table 1-1. Casting these spells still consume a spell slot of the appropriate spell level. Upon reaching 4th level, and at every even-numbered mage level after that (6th, 8th, and so on), a Mage can choose to Perfect a new spell in place of one she already knows. In effect, the Mage "loses" the old Perfected Spell in exchange for the new one. The new spell’s level must be the same as that of the spell being exchanged, and it must be at least one level lower than the highest-level Mage spell the Mage can cast. A Mage may swap only a single Perfected Spell at any given level, and must choose whether or not to swap the spell at the same time that she gains new Perfected spells for the level. At the beginning of her career she treats all Perfected Spells as though she has Escew Material Component. Thoughout the rest of her progression, these spells become more and more innate though they are never fully concidered Spell-like abilities. TABLE 1-2: MAGE SPELLS/DAY ———————————Spells per Day——————————— Level 0 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 1st 3 1 — — — — — — — — 2nd 3 2 — — — — — — — — 3rd 3 2 1 — — — — — — — 4th 3 3 2 — — — — — — — 5th 3 3 2 1 — — — — — — 6th 3 3 3 2 — — — — — — 7th 3 3 3 2 1 — — — — — 8th 3 3 3 3 2 — — — — — 9th 3 3 3 3 2 1 — — — — 10th 3 3 3 3 2 2 — — — — 11th 3 3 3 3 3 2 1 — — — 12th 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 — — — 13th 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 1 — — 14th 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 — — 15th 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 1 — 16th 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 — 17th 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 1 18th 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 19th 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 20th 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Bonus LanguagesA Mage may substitute Draconic for one of the bonus languages available to the character because of her race. Scribe ScrollAt 1st level, a Mage gains Scribe Scroll as a bonus feat. Spellbooks A Mage must study her spellbook each day to read and form her spells. She cannot form any spell not currently recorded in her spellbook, except for Read Magic, which all Mages can prepare from memory, and those that she has mastered. A Mage begins play with a spellbook containing all 0-level Mage (Wizard) spells in the PHB(except those from her prohibited schools) plus three 1st-level spells of your choice. For each point of Intelligence bonus the mage has, the spellbook holds one additional 1st-level spell of your choice. At each new Mage level, she gains two new spells of any spell level or levels that she can cast (based on her new Mage level) for her spellbook. At any time, a Mage can also add spells found in other Mage's or Wizards’ spellbooks to her own. Recognize Perfection At 3rd level a Mage gains a +2 bonus on Spellcraft checks to identify spells that she herself has perfected. Better than Perfect At 5th level, a Mage gains a +1 bonus to her caster level for Perfected Spells. It does not affect your normal spells. It increases your caster level only, which would help you penetrate spell resisitance and increase the duration and other effects of your Perfected Spells. At 15th level this bonus increases to +2 caster levels. Perfectly Silent At 7th level, a Mage has become so in tune with her Pefected Spells that she may now apply Silent Spell to any Perfected Spell below her highest Spell level without an increase in the spell's spell slot level. She must still take a full-round action to do so. At 13th level, this may be applyed with Perfectly Still to spells at least two lower than than the highest level spell availble to a Mage. Bonus Feats At 10th level, a Mage gains a bonus feat. She can choose a metamagic feat, an item creation feat, or Spell Mastery. The Mage must still meet all prerequisites for the bonus feat, including caster level minimums. This bonus feat is in addition to the feats that a character of any class gets from advancing levels. The Mage is not limited to the categories of item creation feats, metamagic feats, or Spell Mastery when choosing feats gained from advancing levels. The Spell Mastery feat has a similar use to the Mage as it does to the Wizard. A Mage with the Spell Mastery feat can form spells without access to her spellbook or a scroll. These spells, however, are still not as innate as the Mage's Perfected Spells; she still must form them in her mind before casting (meaning she must spend a full-round action before hand), though she requires no spellbook to do so. The application of metamagic feats is treated differently depending on what type of spell is being cast. A Mage casting a Perfected Spell altered by metamagic increases her casting time to a full-round action, just as a Sorcerer would. However, A Mage may pick up feats normally available only to Sorcerers (and other spontaneous casters) that allow her to circumnavigate this inconvenience. A Mage casting a spell that is not a Perfected Spell and is altered by metamagic increases neither the time required to form the spell nor the casting time. Sudden Metamagic feats do not increase the casting time nor the time required to form the spell for Mages. Perfectly Still At 13th level, A Mage has become so in tune with her Perfected Spells that she may now apply Still Spell to any Perfected Spell at least one level below her highest Spell level without an increase to the spell's spell slot level. She must still take a full-round action to do so. This may be applyed with Perfectly Silent to spells at least two lower than than the highest level spell availble to a Mage. Perfect Resilience At 18th level a Mage adds a +1 to the Difficulty Class for all saving throws against her Perfected Spells. This stacks with Spell Focus and Greater Spell Focus. Embodiment of PerfectionPerfected Spells that utilize Perfectly Silent, Perfectly Still, or both may now be cast at their normal casting time. A Mage still cannot cast her highest level spells with Perfectly Silent, Perfectly Still, or even her second highest spells with both applied. In addition, Perfected Spells altered by metamagic no longer increase the casting time. This allows Perfected Spells to utilize Quicken Spell without the aid of feats like Accelerated Metamagic. At this point, I want to thank Jaerom Darkwind and Eyeless Blonde. This idea was formed from Jaerom's Arcanist and Eyeless's suggestion to said class. I got the casting idea from Jaerom and the book casting idea from Eyeless. I wanted to try the combination.
Milo HoBo 11-26-06, 08:13 PM	FAQ 1. So a Mage can spontaneously cast any spell in her spellbook? Isn't that broken? A: One might benefit from realizing what I mean by forming a spell. Each spell to be cast, which isn't a Perfected Spell, requires two distinct actions. The first action is just to put the spell in your mind and requires a full-round action. The second action is to cast the spell, which depends on (and usually is) what the spell's natural casting time is. To sum up why this isn't broken, one needs to realize a simple concept of the game. Impact. There are only so many rounds that one spends in a combat situation. One must basically halve the output of spells that would normally be expected from a Wizard. 2. Wait, I thought you said this was a class designed around the idea of removing preparation. Isn't forming a spell the same concept as spell preparation only much faster? A: Look in the glossary in the back of the PH under spell preparation. Here it describes spell preparation as "casting the first and lengthiest part of the spell..." which is much different than simply forming a spell. Concept wise, a Mage forms a spell by tuning herself to magic like a Sorcerer can while using the spellbook (instead of blood relations) to know how to assemble the spell. However, mechanically it is pretty much the same with the exception of it being less annoying, isn't it? 3. So why the complicated metamagic rules? A: Because I want to keep the cost/benefit ratio about even with the Sorcerer and the Wizard. If I could find an easier route, I would. Do you have any suggestions? 4. How should one treat the spellbook in a combat situation? How many hands are required to hold and read the book? What happens with spell components? etc? A: Well, I would say that the spellbook can be held in one hand (and should be treated as though it is opened to the correct page as a free action). This allows the other hand to be used for somatic and manipulation of material/focal components. This means that unless the Mage invests in a levitating spellbook there might not be any free hands to hold a weapon, wand, or staff. Please keep in mind, since the spellbook is exposed, the sensible thing to do is make duplicates and cover the spellbook with a good hard cover to avoid damage from spells or sundering attempts. To learn more about increasing the survivability to your spellbook, please reference the Complete Arcane. 5. Can I multiclass between Wizard and Mage? A: Well, technically the Mage is a variant of the Wizard, which means no. However, your DM always has the final word in your game. 6. Why so few spell slots? A: Mechanically, they should require few than a Wizard because they don't have to worry about preparing the wrong spell. Thematically, they have to do large calculations very quickly and act as a magical lightning rod, you would wear out more quickly too. 7. Perfected Spells according to the class ability and spells mastered by means of Spell Mastery are different. Could you explain how? A: Perfected Spells as the class ability are limited by your specialization and gain all of the benefits outlined throughout the text of the class. Spells mastered by means of Spell Mastery feat are treated as normal spells (for the Mage) with the single exception of being able to be formed without the aid of a written form of the spell (they must still be formed, however). Originially I used the term Mastered Spells instead of Perfected Spells which gave rise to confusion.
Milo HoBo 11-26-06, 08:16 PM	In order to explain the mechanical flavor of the Mage, I must first make a quick explaination of how I view the Wizard's and the Sorcerer's mechanical flavor. Patch = Spell Weave = Unaltered magical field that is everywhere (with the exception of anti-magic fields and such) Wizards create a single-use 'patches' that can be applied to the weave. They 'create' these 'patches' (normally) at the beginning of everyday and are able to later apply them when the need arises. The application of the 'patches' is very quick, but the 'patch' is usually weak and cannot be applied multiple times (single-use). Sorcerers do not create these 'patches' but instead know the location of certain 'patches' that naturally occure in the weave. It is often debated how they know this. Since they occure naturally, there is no need to prepare the 'patches' ahead of time and the 'patches' are more self-sustaining (multiple use). Since it takes so little effort to shift these natural 'patches' from one section of the weave to another, Sorcerers can do it as quickly as a Wizard and can cast more spells than a Wizard. Things slow down with the application of metamagic, but this is the way of the weave. Mages are more closely related to a Sorcerer. They do not ever prepare spells. They, like the Sorcerer, use the natural 'patches' that occure in the weave. The difference is, a Mage knows the location of very few natural 'patches' but can use her spellbook to locate others. In this way, her spellbook is more like an address book of natural 'patches' in the weave. So what does this mean for copying spells from a Wizard spellbook or from a Mage? Nothing. The location of a 'patch' allows a Wizard to find and copy his own version of a 'patch'. A Mage can use a Wizard's version of a 'patch' to find similar natural 'patches' within the weave, since she now knows what it looks like. This is exactly how Sorcerers have been able to Scribe scrolls for Wizards.
Milo HoBo 11-26-06, 08:42 PM	Saved just in case.
Alpha_Moose 11-26-06, 09:22 PM	I like the idea. The class looks pretty cool, but I would say give them a bit more spells known, just at first look. It is interesting how you made a mix between a wizard and sorcerer.
Milo HoBo 11-26-06, 09:38 PM	Thank you, I've really enjoyed fleshing out some of the ideas. I like the idea. The class looks pretty cool, but I would say give them a bit more spells known, just at first look. It is interesting how you made a mix between a wizard and sorcerer.Do you mean Spells Mastered (Perfected), Spell Known, or Spells per day? If you mean Spell per day:7. Why so few spell slots? A: Mechanically, they should require few than a Wizard because they don't have to worry about preparing the wrong spell. Thematically, they have to do large calculations very quickly and act as a magical lightning rod, you would wear out more quickly too.Am I wrong? Should I think about still giving them more? It was meant to balance the sem-spontaneous nature of their spellcasting. If you mean spells known, they're like a Wizard. They know as many as they can find +2 per level. If you mean Spells Mastered (Perfected), I feel alittle worried about stepping on the Sorcerers toes, but I'll think about it.
Tokorona 11-26-06, 09:58 PM	IMHO, the class needs two things,. 1, more spells per day, or something to make the spell trade off more valueable. 2. THe spellbook needs some bonuses to make it hard to be stolen, or such. It'd get costly quick to keep up it with elsewise. I seriously disagree with the full-round+ casting times, since they make it on th face, weaker than Wizard or Sorcerer. And.. I'm not even sure whre that flavor is comign from.
Krusk 11-26-06, 11:07 PM	Its a full round for the ones he hasnt mastered. So he gets the spells he thinks are useful that are the ones he can do at normal speed. but then he gets ontop of that any spell he writes down if he spends a round first to ready himself for it. So by casting spells slower he is casting much less spells per encounter. Seems like he will have about the same ammount of spells cast per combat as a wizard of the same level, but with a little more versitility. Ive been wondering how to do a spontaneous-ish wizard who focues more on the book for a while now, so this is very cool to see done. My one suggestion would be to add something to help them protect their spell book, maybe give it a familiar like progression. level 1 expanded pages, level 3 bonus to hardness level 5 sumon book, ect because it seems to me that they are needing something to push them up in power slightly. And being that i would see them when spending their round to prepare to cast the spell, frantically flipping pages, and reading to find the spell they wanted. I would add these extra benifits, just so the enemy cant destroy it.
Tokorona 11-26-06, 11:34 PM	Erg. Reread it. A Mage also has the ability to master a small number of spells as she advances, which must be drawn from her school of specialization and be spells that she has studied extensively enough to have written them in her spellbook. When casting these spells, she need not spend a full-round action to form the spell in her mind, and also does not require access to a scribed version of the spell. These spells are so familiar to her that she can cast them at their normal casting time. She gains one Spells Mastered per level. They may never be traded out. You know, I'm not sure about this. One) Generalists don't like this. They don't specalize Two) "studied extensively" ? Three) And.. 1 per level, no trade out? For normal casting time? THis is a rather weak ability.
Alpha_Moose 11-26-06, 11:51 PM	Thank you, I've really enjoyed fleshing out some of the ideas. Do you mean Spells Mastered, Spell Known, or Spells per day? I meant spells known. It's fine if he cast so few spells, but the time it takes makes me think he should know more than even the wizard, plus I think it goes with the theme well (don't know if you think so).
Seerow 11-26-06, 11:58 PM	y'know, you PMed me about this, I read the PM when I was in a hurry, said I'd come back to it later... totally forgot about it then stumbled across this thread by accident and said "Hey, this looks familiar" Yeah, that was random. Here's a question for something that just occured to me. Can the Book Wizard form a spell using a scroll, or does it -have- to come from his spell book? Just asking because Scribe Scroll seems to imply scrolls would be important to him, but it really benefits him less than it does a Wizard.
Milo HoBo 11-27-06, 12:25 AM	You know, I'm not sure about this. One) Generalists don't like this. They don't specalize Two) "studied extensively" ? Three) And.. 1 per level, no trade out? For normal casting time? This is a rather weak ability.1) I've thought about, but haven't come up with a good fix. I prefer generalists as well. 2) ...has studied extensively enough to have written them in her spellbook. Meaning either, they are spells that she copied down first and upon leveling up she took them as Mastered (Perfected) Spells or one of her two spells she gets in her spellbook for free is also a Mastered (Perfected) Spell. To further explain, she does not get the Spells Mastered (Perfected) from nowhere. If she could just pick any spell, she would get 2 for her spellbook and one for her Spells Mastered (Perfected). Maybe I should give Mages 3 spells per level. Anyone agree? 3) Well, if you have nearly spontaneous access to spellbook with a hand full of purly spontaneous spells, I would have thought it would leveled out. I still stand by it, but will consider allowing trade-outs.I meant spells known. It's fine if he cast so few spells, but the time it takes makes me think he should know more than even the wizard, plus I think it goes with the theme well (don't know if you think so).She knows as many as a Wizard does. I guess I'm not exactly seeing why she should get more, but see above.y'know, you PMed me about this, I read the PM when I was in a hurry, said I'd come back to it later... totally forgot about it then stumbled across this thread by accident and said "Hey, this looks familiar" Yeah, that was random. Here's a question for something that just occured to me. Can the Book Wizard form a spell using a scroll, or does it -have- to come from his spell book? Just asking because Scribe Scroll seems to imply scrolls would be important to him, but it really benefits him less than it does a Wizard.Yeah, I changed threads for more space and stuff. She can use a scroll (for viewing purposes) and it is not used up in the process. However, just like a spellbook (even moreso actually) it is in danger from being exposed during combat. Scrolls are still very useful because they don't take extra time and you don't have to expose your spellbook.
Tokorona 11-27-06, 04:13 AM	Well, see.. The Sorc uses spontaneous casting and he does poorly. It's not a good thing to be spontaneous, although your suggestions go a far way to makign it work, and I'd agree that it'd make the class workable. And I like the flavor, just.. the spellbook needs something if it's going to be out like that so often
Milo HoBo 11-27-06, 10:16 AM	Well, see.. The Sorc uses spontaneous casting and he does poorly. It's not a good thing to be spontaneous, although your suggestions go a far way to makign it work, and I'd agree that it'd make the class workable. And I like the flavor, just.. the spellbook needs something if it's going to be out like that so oftenThe way I've understood it, the Sorcerer does poorly for several reasons, but spontaneous casting isn't one of them. Lack of bonus feats, staggered casting progression, very few spells known, little skill points, and no class features beyond a familiar. However, I agree that the spellbook needs protection, but I have the feeling that the Mage should pay for it himself instead of it being a class feature. However, the idea of carrying several spellbooks into combat is not appealing to me. What would people think about making his spells only taking 1 or 2 pages each while paying the normal cost?
Subversive 11-27-06, 11:25 AM	I love the idea of the class. A few things tho: The class should be able to switch out its spontaneously cast spells. There are some spells that have a lot of versatility at low levels which become entirely useless as the characters progress to mid-high level campaigns. Those will end up being dead slots. Second: how will this class handle prestige classes that advance arcane casting ability insofar as its spontaneous spells? Will those spells advance as well or are they left behind until more levels in the book mage are taken? Third, I agree with you that the class probably does not need extra spells. In fact, I'd actually go as far as to say that you might be allowing too many spontaneously castable spells. Altough they are limited to the caster's specialization school, 20 spells out of 27 1st through 9th level slots seems excessive. Fourth, no familiar? Poor, lonely d4 caster.... Finally, I think that having the casting time for applying metamagic feats to the caster's spells be more then one round is far too severe. Even though the process is faster, the caster is learning these spells as a wizard would, and standard wizard rules should apply. Simply have the spell take up the appropriately higher slot. In game terms, he is applying the metamagic feat as he is memorizing the spell, just as a regular wizard would. Metamagic feats are not inherently unbalanced, and the higher spell slot cost balances out the extra benefit. Remember that it's already taking the caster a full-round action and a standard action to cast the spell. extending that time any longer is a good way to ensure that metamagic feats will never be used. -Steve
Milo HoBo 11-28-06, 02:32 AM	I love the idea of the class. A few things tho: The class should be able to switch out its spontaneously cast spells. There are some spells that have a lot of versatility at low levels which become entirely useless as the characters progress to mid-high level campaigns. Those will end up being dead slots.Done Second: how will this class handle prestige classes that advance arcane casting ability insofar as its spontaneous spells? Will those spells advance as well or are they left behind until more levels in the book mage are taken?It is a seperate class feature that will be left behind.Third, I agree with you that the class probably does not need extra spells. In fact, I'd actually go as far as to say that you might be allowing too many spontaneously castable spells. Altough they are limited to the caster's specialization school, 20 spells out of 27 1st through 9th level slots seems excessive.It's really the four 9th level spells that bothered me. It has been changed.Fourth, no familiar? Poor, lonely d4 caster....Sorry, no pet.Finally, I think that having the casting time for applying metamagic feats to the caster's spells be more then one round is far too severe. Even though the process is faster, the caster is learning these spells as a wizard would, and standard wizard rules should apply. Simply have the spell take up the appropriately higher slot. In game terms, he is applying the metamagic feat as he is memorizing the spell, just as a regular wizard would. Metamagic feats are not inherently unbalanced, and the higher spell slot cost balances out the extra benefit. Remember that it's already taking the caster a full-round action and a standard action to cast the spell. extending that time any longer is a good way to ensure that metamagic feats will never be used.There is already several ways around it. That is just if you are completely unprepared. Ways to prepare include: a) Sudden Metamagic Feats b) Metamagic Rods c) Copying the spell into your spellbook with the metamagic feat you desire already applied. Thank you everyone so far. How do you like the changes?
Subversive 11-28-06, 05:28 PM	I like some of the changes, and still have issues with others. However, I don't have the time to draw up a full commentary at the moment, so this post will have to serve as a *Bump*
Milo HoBo 11-28-06, 08:10 PM	I'm actually not happy with it here either. I think that some of the abilities are too weak, like Recognize Perfection, while other's are too strong. The biggest being the capstone abilty which doesn't work for most spells anyways. I'm thinking instead of going a direction that allows them to slowly start to cast their Perfected Spells without components, starting with material, then verbal, then somatic. Maybe ending it with 3 quickened. But I really don't know. That is a whole new direction for me. Maybe I should have stuck with bonus feats.
Subversive 11-29-06, 10:47 PM	OK, I finally got some time to take a look at this. Sorry for taking so long... Forming a spell requires a full-round action to concentrate on the spell which provokes an attack of opportunity. This attack of opportunity may be avoided by making a concentration check equal to 15 + the spell level of the spell being formed. In order to form a spell the Mage must (usually) be viewing a scribed version of the spell in a spellbook or scroll. If she is successful in forming the spell, it forms in the Mage's mind at the end of her full-round action and can be cast (requiring a standard, swift, immediate, etc. action) at it's normal casting time when you have the next available action; at this point the spell slot is deducted from her total. If the Mage does not cast the readied spell within a number of minutes equal to her level, it fades from her mind as if cast. I'm curious about the reference to looking at a scroll. Are you saying here that a book mage can cast a spell using a scroll without actually casting from the scroll (thus consuming it)? This is an interesting idea if so, but I wonder if it works mechanically. Wizards cannot memorize off of scrolls, and I believe they specifically mention that this isn't possible in the scroll description. Also, you might want to specifically mention that looking up the spell is part of the full round action. Perfected Spells A Mage also has the ability to master a small number of spells as she advances, which must be drawn from her school of specialization and be spells that she has studied extensively enough to have written them in her spellbook. When casting these spells, she need not spend a full-round action to form the spell in her mind, and also does not require access to a scribed version of the spell. These spells are so familiar to her that she can cast them at their normal casting time. She gains one Perfected Spell per level. You need to edit the last sentence, since the book mage no longer gets one spell per level. Also, you should say explicitly that casting a perfected spell burns one slot of the same level from the book caster's daily allotment (unless this isn't the case) Mages use a unique system for recording a spell's location in the weave that drastically reduces the space of requirements, but not the cost, of maintaining spellbooks. Every spell she learns for her Mage class requires only a single page in her spellbook. It still takes 24 hours to scribe a spell into a spellbook and materials costing 100 gp per spell level. I'm not sure that I like this. For one thing, it means that other spellcasters cannot copy spells from a book mage. This reduces their versitility to an extent. There's nothing wrong with requiring them to carry a few books with them. By the time that it will really matter, they'll have some decent storage options anyway. Recognize Perfection At 3rd level a Mage gains a +2 bonus on Spellcraft checks to identify spells that she herself has perfected. This is a nice idea. If you want to give some additional power to the book caster, why not up his saves to spells in his casting specialization at higher levels. Better than Perfect At 5th level, a Mage gains a bonus to her caster level for Perfected Spells. It does not affect your normal spells. It increases your caster level only, which would help you penetrate spell resisitance and increase the duration and other effects of your Perfected Spells. At 15th level this bonus increases to +2 caster levels. You should edit this to explicitly mention it is a +1 bonus at 5th level. The Spell Mastery feat has a similar use to the Mage as it does to the Wizard. A Mage with the Spell Mastery feat can form spells without access to her spellbook or a scroll. These spells, however, are still not as innate as the Mage's Perfected Spells; she still must form them in her mind before casting (meaning she must spend a full-round action before hand), though she requires no spellbook to do so. Another option you have here is that Spell Mastery can only apply to his perfected spells. Either way, I'd have it apply to one or the other. Get into both and it becomes too complicated. A Mage casting a spell that is not a Perfected Spell and is altered by metamagic increases the time required to form the spell (but not the casting time) to a 1 round action (ending at the beginning of her next turn). This may also be avoided by a little extra preparation on the Mage's part. A Mage is allowed to write spells in her spellbook with metamagic feats (that she knows) already applied by applying the cost as appropriate for its new spell slot level. Sudden Metamagic feats do not increase the casting time for Mages. This is needless. Spells only take up one page in the book caster's spellbook, so all it will cost the mage is the price of ink. Even if you change that aspect of the caster's abilities, it will still become nothing more then a nuisance and light drain on the caster's resources. It makes far more sense to just allow the caster to cast non-perfected spells after a full round action to recall the spell. Since this aspect of the class' abilities is akin to wizard memorization it doesn't make sense to place a sorcerer-like burden on them. They will just end up not using metamagic for these spells. Anyway, that's my current opinion on the class. I would also think about re-engineering the perfection levels a little bit, maybe combining some of those bonuses under one umbrella term and ticking it up every few levels. -Steve
Subversive 11-29-06, 11:01 PM	I'm actually not happy with it here either. I think that some of the abilities are too weak, like Recognize Perfection, while other's are too strong. The biggest being the capstone abilty which doesn't work for most spells anyways. I'm thinking instead of going a direction that allows them to slowly start to cast their Perfected Spells without components, starting with material, then verbal, then somatic. Maybe ending it with 3 quickened. But I really don't know. That is a whole new direction for me. Maybe I should have stuck with bonus feats. I agree that the perfection ability chain is going to be highly focused, and might result in a sort of min-maxed battle caster type. If you're going to go in this direction, you need to think about restricting the perfection spells to only about one per spell level, each castable once per day, a-la the priest. I'll roll it around in my head a little. I'm not sure if the quickened thing will work best either. Maybe something that reflects his quick study ability, or the fact that his nose is always stuck in a book. -Steve
Subversive 11-29-06, 11:14 PM	Double post. sorry.
E_Morrow 11-29-06, 11:59 PM	I have to say this is a very interesting and seemingly balanced class. Comparing it strictly to a normal Wizard, the Mage's special abilities replace the Wizard's bonus feats and familiar quite nicely and one less spell per day for each of the 9 spell levels combined with required specialization should help make sure it doesn't become a fully spontaneous generalist caster. The one round prep time per spell ties it to the Wizard and the perfected spells that can be swapped out at various levels is reminiscent of the Sorcerer. All in all, a very nifty class that walks the middle ground between the two Core primary arcane casters. Good job.
Subversive 11-30-06, 12:32 AM	I agree. I think the class has some legs. I wouldn't mind introducing it in one of my DM'd games. -Steve
BlaineTog 11-30-06, 12:45 AM	Here's an idea. Keep the spellbook the same as the wizard's spellbook, but allow the Mage to create notebooks of Casting Notes. He can cast off of either book, but the casting notes are simple and cheap to make, and he can afford to lose them occasionally; maybe they need to be updated each morning, too, so losing the spellbook is still a big deal. As for Perfected Spells, I'd change them to "Prepared Spells" and let the Mage change them each morning. I also see no reason to force him to specialize. Remove that part, or leave it in the same as with the Wizard, and let him pick Perfected Spells from anything in his book.
Subversive 11-30-06, 02:10 AM	Actually, I disagree. I think the class as it stands is an interesting mix of restricted generalist and focused specialization. I like the idea of having all the "perfected" spells be restricted to one school. In a way, it makes him sort of like a cleric, who has bonus spells restricted to a domain. It also prevents a level of spell cherrypicking, which will result in overpower. For example, under your suggestion, the mage could pick Wish/Limited Wish as two of his "prepared" spells, which strikes me as overpowered, since they can be used to duplicate the effects of most other spells, thus bypassing the full-round restriction to the class for a small XP sacrifice. The casting notes idea is interesting, but seems a little redundant. Also, the problem I see here is they would have to be notes for all of his spells that he intended to cast, which basically means he's carrying around two spellbooks for the benefit of one. It gets even worse if he's updating them every morning... -Steve
BlaineTog 11-30-06, 10:09 AM	It also prevents a level of spell cherrypicking, which will result in overpower. For example, under your suggestion, the mage could pick Wish/Limited Wish as two of his "prepared" spells, which strikes me as overpowered, since they can be used to duplicate the effects of most other spells, thus bypassing the full-round restriction to the class for a small XP sacrifice.How is that Cherrypicking? And if the mage wants to blow 300 or 5,000 XP every time he wants to cast a spell, so be it. That's a huge investment. The casting notes idea is interesting, but seems a little redundant.Um... yes? That's the point? Also, the problem I see here is they would have to be notes for all of his spells that he intended to cast, which basically means he's carrying around two spellbooks for the benefit of one.Sorta, yeah, but he'd have to be insane to not do this already with two full spellbooks. The chances of losing his spellbook are very high if he has to hold it out during combat. He would have to be casting off a secondary spellbook, unless he's into extreme sports, like gambling pretty much all his class abilities. It gets even worse if he's updating them every morning...How does it get worse? By "update," I meant adjusting little details here and there. Mechanically, it'd basically mean he has to spend maybe an hour in the morning double-checking and tweaking his notes against the spellbook, no more.
Subversive 11-30-06, 11:18 AM	How is that Cherrypicking? And if the mage wants to blow 300 or 5,000 XP every time he wants to cast a spell, so be it. That's a huge investment. At the levels these spells come into play, it's pretty minimal per encounter. Having the caster pick a school of specialization gives them a limited selection of spells to choose from that are thematically related. Allowing them to pick whatever spells they want will encourage powergaming choices. Um... yes? That's the point? Sorta, yeah, but he'd have to be insane to not do this already with two full spellbooks. The chances of losing his spellbook are very high if he has to hold it out during combat. He would have to be casting off a secondary spellbook, unless he's into extreme sports, like gambling pretty much all his class abilities. I think your idea is functional, but it seems messy to me, making the caster rely on two sources for his spells seems like a lot more resources for the character (and it's player) to manage. Granted, it is similar to runecasters, so maybe it's not a bad an idea. Perhaps instead of introducing casting notes, why not instead have the caster's spellbook improve in hitpoints and hardness as the character's level progresses, maybe gain some additional immunities to energy types. How does it get worse? By "update," I meant adjusting little details here and there. Mechanically, it'd basically mean he has to spend maybe an hour in the morning double-checking and tweaking his notes against the spellbook, no more. ok, I see what you're getting at here. I just like the thematic image of the caster paging hurredly through his spellbook to find just the right spellbook for the occasion. -Steve
BlaineTog 11-30-06, 01:18 PM	At the levels these spells come into play, it's pretty minimal per encounter.Still, he's paying hard-earned XP (as well as higher-level spell slots, and one of his Perfected spells) for the privledge of casting spells faster. I think that's fair. Having the caster pick a school of specialization gives them a limited selection of spells to choose from that are thematically related.Well, yes and no. The spells will be thematically similar in that they all do similar things, but it may not fit the overall themes of the character well for them all to come from the same school(s). What's more, thematic matching isn't necessarily a good thing. Allowing them to pick whatever spells they want will encourage powergaming choices.How is it any less power-game-encouraging as-is? Currently, they just have to pick the best school. In any case, the issue isn't if it encourages powergaming or not (see the Stormwing fallacy for more on that), but if it actually means they become overpowered or not. I put forth that they don't. I think your idea is functional, but it seems messy to me, making the caster rely on two sources for his spells seems like a lot more resources for the character (and it's player) to manage.No, it's a lot less, because the casting notes would be easier to manage than a second spellbook. The casting notes have the same spells as the spellbook off which they were made that morning, whereas if he has two spellbooks, he has to manage both seperatelly. Perhaps instead of introducing casting notes, why not instead have the caster's spellbook improve in hitpoints and hardness as the character's level progresses, maybe gain some additional immunities to energy types.Because A) logic, and B) risk remains. If you want to make it a real threat that he might lose his spellbook (and that's one of the balance factors here), you have to make it so that he will occasionally lose it. That becomes cruel to do if it's a full spellbook, and even when you make the book tougher, you still have to get rid of it, which cripples the character unless he made a second (or third) one. If it's just casting notes, however, it's an inconvenience, and it's a weakness upon which the DM can nonsadistically prey rather than this big threat which he can't really take advantage of. Taking out the spellbook is too mean, and not taking it out is too nice. Taking out casting notes, on the other hand, is just right. ok, I see what you're getting at here. I just like the thematic image of the caster paging hurredly through his spellbook to find just the right spellbook for the occasion.Yep, and he still does that.
Subversive 11-30-06, 02:00 PM	Still, he's paying hard-earned XP (as well as higher-level spell slots, and one of his Perfected spells) for the privledge of casting spells faster. I think that's fair. For a small XP fee you're bypassing much of the restrictions of the class. That has me concerned. Well, yes and no. The spells will be thematically similar in that they all do similar things, but it may not fit the overall themes of the character well for them all to come from the same school(s). What's more, thematic matching isn't necessarily a good thing. I disagree with you here. The spells come from the same school of casting, therefore they are thematically similar. As far as they might not fit with the character? Come on... The player has multiple schools to choose from, just as any player of a specialized wizard does, and if you're going to say that thematic matching isn't a good thing, you should back that opinion up with examples. How is it any less power-game-encouraging as-is? Currently, they just have to pick the best school. In any case, the issue isn't if it encourages powergaming or not (see the Stormwing fallacy for more on that), but if it actually means they become overpowered or not. I put forth that they don't. I disagree. When you're limited to one school, you are limited to your selection of spells. You can't pick the spell for a level that is deemed the "most powerful." Also, it introduces limitations into the caster that he must overcome with alternate abilities. A book mage specializing in illusions will have a tough time with undead, and will have to rely more on his standard spells that take two rounds to cast. Same with an enchanter. It is certainly a reduction in terms of overall power, but one that the class can anticipate and make accomidations for. No, it's a lot less, because the casting notes would be easier to manage than a second spellbook. The casting notes have the same spells as the spellbook off which they were made that morning, whereas if he has two spellbooks, he has to manage both seperatelly. As for having a backup spellbook, a lot of wizards do that anyway, but my point is that he doesn't really need two spellbooks. He needs one with the ability to make it more durable and survivable. If you want to make it a real threat that he might lose his spellbook (and that's one of the balance factors here), you have to make it so that he will occasionally lose it. That becomes cruel to do if it's a full spellbook, and even when you make the book tougher, you still have to get rid of it, which cripples the character unless he made a second (or third) one. I don't think there's a need to create a real threat, only anticipate the possibility of one. You don't have to get rid of it at all, and I don't follow your logic here. Rememeber, any time an arcanist critically fails a save to a damaging effect, all of his possessions, including his spellbook, are threatened by damage anyway. The only additional risks to the book mage are sunder and disarm, since you can't target items that are being held or used with damaging effects (save with certain feats). Make the book tough enough, and sunder's not much of a problem. Give him a method to recall the book and disarm's taken care of. You might actually increase the survivability of a book mage as compared to a standard wizard by doing this. The key is to balance the class' increased reliance on their spellbook against a standard wizard's general spellbook vulnerability, and I think that can be accomplished without introducing a seperate spellbook notes system. If it's just casting notes, however, it's an inconvenience, and it's a weakness upon which the DM can nonsadistically prey rather than this big threat which he can't really take advantage of. Taking out the spellbook is too mean, and not taking it out is too nice. Taking out casting notes, on the other hand, is just right. OK, I see what you are saying here, and this is a decent point. My question them becomes, is this too big a weakness? Granted, if casting notes are taken out by an opponent, the mage can recover by creating more. However, he's taken out of the fight just about completely, and perhaps for the rest of that day's fighting as well (if he is only able to update his notes after 8 hours of rest). There's a lot of abuse potential in that by a sadistic DM, far more then the threat of damage to a toughened spellbook, which can be repaired with a cantrip. If the mage is losing his caster notes in every fight, you'll quickly see the mage multiclassing into druid... :rolleye2: -Steve
Tokorona 11-30-06, 02:19 PM	My summary reply is forcing someone to specalize is a bad idea. I'm not at all itnersted in this class anymore - please. I'm tired of classes that force specalization to be at all decent. It's not at all a good idea The page a spell thing is noted. Ine ssensce, it does strike a balance between Wizard and Sorc. It's also got no real unique reason to play it besides "flipping through a spellbook that's going to get Sundered if your enemy's any good."
BlaineTog 11-30-06, 04:50 PM	For a small XP fee you're bypassing much of the restrictions of the class. That has me concerned.Is it really that small? 300 XP could save you 3,750 gp off a magic item. 5,000 XP (more than 1/4th a level, btw) could save you 62,500 gp. How would you like having to blow 3,750 gp just to cast a spell (which you could already probably cast) a little faster? How about 62,500 gp? What's more, these are high level spells; you can only cast them so many times per day (very few, too). I disagree with you here. The spells come from the same school of casting, therefore they are thematically similar.In some ways, sure, but not in all cases. Cause Fear and Animate Undead are both Necromancy, and they're both generally unpleasant, but Cause Fear has more in common with the Enchantment spells than with the line based around undead. As far as they might not fit with the character? Come on... The player has multiple schools to choose from, just as any player of a specialized wizard does, and if you're going to say that thematic matching isn't a good thing, you should back that opinion up with examples.What? The Mage can only pick Perfected Spells (the ones we're talking about) from her single Specialization school (Divination and Abjuration being the exception, although the two really are very different and shouldn't be lumped together from a flavorical perspective). She can pick other spells as spells in her spellbook, but that's beside the point. As for examples, fine, although I thought this would be obvious. Cause Fear and Hideous Laughter are something of two sides of the same coin, and a single Mage might easily make that her thing. How about Darkness and Invisibility? Glitterdust and Blindness/Deafness? Obscure Object and Misdirection? I'm not even leaving 2nd level spells here. How abouth 9th? Imprisonment and [/i]Dominate Monster[/i]. Power Word Kill and Wail of the Banshee. Gate and [/i]Etherealness[/i]. Crushing Hand and Soul Trap (get 'em both body and soul). I can go on for a very long time. I disagree. When you're limited to one school, you are limited to your selection of spells. You can't pick the spell for a level that is deemed the "most powerful." Also, it introduces limitations into the caster that he must overcome with alternate abilities. A book mage specializing in illusions will have a tough time with undead, and will have to rely more on his standard spells that take two rounds to cast. Same with an enchanter. It is certainly a reduction in terms of overall power, but one that the class can anticipate and make accomidations for.Ah, it reduces the overall power of the class, this is true, but we're talking about encouraging powergaming. Currently, you just pick the best school you can find, rather than just the best spells. As for having a backup spellbook, a lot of wizards do that anyway, but my point is that he doesn't really need two spellbooks. He needs one with the ability to make it more durable and survivable.But it will still be attacked, and he'll still presumeably lose it. I don't think there's a need to create a real threat, only anticipate the possibility of one. You don't have to get rid of it at all, and I don't follow your logic here.The threat isn't a threat if he isn't going to lose his spellbook. Rememeber, any time an arcanist critically fails a save to a damaging effect, all of his possessions, including his spellbook, are threatened by damage anyway.Remind me, where does it say this? I don't necessarily doubt you, but I want to be sure we're talking about the RAW. I also seem to remember that possesions in bags don't have to make saves. The only additional risks to the book mage are sunder and disarm, since you can't target items that are being held or used with damaging effects (save with certain feats). Make the book tough enough, and sunder's not much of a problem.No, you'd be hard pressed to make the book tough enough to resist sundering from anyone with a sunder-oriented combat style. Heck, a fighter with an adamantine weapon and Improved Sunder could probably make very quick work of a spellbook. And if you needed your spellbook to cast each spell but 11 of them, your enemies would only be all the more motivated to sunder/steal it. Give him a method to recall the book and disarm's taken care of. You might actually increase the survivability of a book mage as compared to a standard wizard by doing this. The key is to balance the class' increased reliance on their spellbook against a standard wizard's general spellbook vulnerability, and I think that can be accomplished without introducing a seperate spellbook notes system.It may be possible, but I think it's far simpler (both from a mechanics perspective and for the DM) to add an expendable notebook. OK, I see what you are saying here, and this is a decent point. My question them becomes, is this too big a weakness? Granted, if casting notes are taken out by an opponent, the mage can recover by creating more. However, he's taken out of the fight just about completely, and perhaps for the rest of that day's fighting as well (if he is only able to update his notes after 8 hours of rest). There's a lot of abuse potential in that by a sadistic DM, far more then the threat of damage to a toughened spellbook, which can be repaired with a cantrip. If the mage is losing his caster notes in every fight, you'll quickly see the mage multiclassing into druid... :rolleye2:Attacking it every combat is just as cruel as throwing a rogue or an Enchanter into an undead-hunter campaign. Attacking the wizard's spellnotes would take him out for the day (unless he wanted to risk using his spellbook, which he can still do), assuming he doesn't have a spare, but that's ok every so often.
Tuah 11-30-06, 06:05 PM	Is this where the creation of shorthand began? :D Personally, I think this class is awesome. I might even adopt it in my own campain!
Subversive 11-30-06, 10:16 PM	Is it really that small? 300 XP could save you 3,750 gp off a magic item. 5,000 XP (more than 1/4th a level, btw) could save you 62,500 gp. How would you like having to blow 3,750 gp just to cast a spell (which you could already probably cast) a little faster? How about 62,500 gp? What's more, these are high level spells; you can only cast them so many times per day (very few, too). I concede to this point. In some ways, sure, but not in all cases. Cause Fear and Animate Undead are both Necromancy, and they're both generally unpleasant, but Cause Fear has more in common with the Enchantment spells than with the line based around undead. We're not talking about what the spells are MOST thematically linked to, just that they're overarcingly related by a theme. Horrid Wilting does damage like a fireball, that doesn't mean it's similar from a thematic perspective. Yes, individual spells might be similar to spells from other schools, but they still all have a common theme to their home school. What? The Mage can only pick Perfected Spells (the ones we're talking about) from her single Specialization school (Divination and Abjuration being the exception, although the two really are very different and shouldn't be lumped together from a flavorical perspective). She can pick other spells as spells in her spellbook, but that's beside the point. I agree with you about Div and Abj. They shouldn't be together. As for examples, fine, although I thought this would be obvious. Cause Fear and Hideous Laughter are something of two sides of the same coin, and a single Mage might easily make that her thing. How about Darkness and Invisibility? Glitterdust and Blindness/Deafness? Obscure Object and Misdirection? I'm not even leaving 2nd level spells here. How abouth 9th? Imprisonment and [/i]Dominate Monster[/i]. Power Word Kill and Wail of the Banshee. Gate and [/i]Etherealness[/i]. Crushing Hand and Soul Trap (get 'em both body and soul). I can go on for a very long time. That's not what we were talking about though. I was responding to your statement that thematic matching isn't necessarily a good thing, and I don't see anything from the above example that explains that statement. Ah, it reduces the overall power of the class, this is true, but we're talking about encouraging powergaming. Currently, you just pick the best school you can find, rather than just the best spells. There is much more powergaming (and straight power, which you just conceded) involved in being able to pick specific spells rather then pick a school. There are 8 schools to choose from vs., what? 1000 spells from all the suppliments and texts available? Even if you go for the power schools such as conjuration or evocation you're losing out by getting restricted from other schools, a balancing effect, rather then just picking whatever spells you want and accruing benefits without any drawbacks. Remind me, where does it say this? I don't necessarily doubt you, but I want to be sure we're talking about the RAW. I also seem to remember that possesions in bags don't have to make saves. Player's Handbook, pg 177, bottom of the first column. It specifies exposed items, so you seem to be right on that. Table 10-1: Items Affected by Magical Attacks 1st: Shield 2nd: Armor 3rd: Magic Helmet Hat, or Headband 4th: Item in hand 5th: Magic Cloak 6th: Stowed or sheathed weapon 7th: Magic Bracers 8th: Magic Clothing 9th: Magic jewlery (including rings) 10th: Anything else Items Surviving after a Saving Throw: Unless the descriptive text for the spell specifies otherwise, all items carried or worn by a creature are assumed to survive a magical attack. If a creature rolls a natural 1 on its saving throw against the effect, however, an exposed item is harmed (if the attack can harm objects). Refer to Table 10-1: Items Affected by Magical Attack. Determine which four objects carried or worn by the creature are most likely to be affected and roll randomly among them. The randomly determined item must make a saving throw against the attack form and take whatever damage the attack deals (see Smashing an Object page 165). For instance, Tordek is hit by a lightning bolt and gets a natural 1 on his saving throw. The items of his most likely to have been affected are his shield, his armor, his waraxe (in his hand), and his shortbow (stowed). (He doesn't have magic headgear or a magic cloak, so these entries are skipped). If an item is not carried or worn and is not magical, it does not get a saving throw. It simply is dealt the appropriate damage. You're convincing me about the potential of this, but I still have some reservations below. It may be possible, but I think it's far simpler (both from a mechanics perspective and for the DM) to add an expendable notebook. Attacking it every combat is just as cruel as throwing a rogue or an Enchanter into an undead-hunter campaign. Attacking the wizard's spellnotes would take him out for the day (unless he wanted to risk using his spellbook, which he can still do), assuming he doesn't have a spare, but that's ok every so often. The problem I have with this is, in part, your assumption that attacking the spellcaster's notes is equivalent to putting a rogue in a tomb full of liches. The former is justifiable and good strategy, which any character with a weapon and decent combat ability can utilize - and probably should when placed in that situation. The latter is bad encounter design on the DM's part. As well to say that having an enemy sunder the fighter's sword is like putting an enchanter up against a room full of gelatinous cubes. If a combat type makes it past the blockers and to the caster, you'd better believe that he's going to go after the caster's primary strength. In a way you've sort of dug yourself into a pit here, because you just spent 3 posts talking about how much of a threat the caster faces from sunders and the like, but you're not willing to concede that this might be an even bigger problem. At least with an ability tree that creates a highly durable spellbook, the caster faces less of a chance of losing it (fairly easily) to every random encounter, and being knocked out of the game for a full day. Secondly, you mention making extra copies of his notes. How would this work, mechanically, especially since earlier you were talking about having him update them every morning. Can he make five copies? Ten? Does he have to update them all? Do you actually expect him to have notes for his entire spellbook, potentially hundreds of pages, and yet he can still make modifications every morning within 15 minutes? As I said, I still have problems with this. Maybe there's another route that can be explored. -Steve
BlaineTog 12-01-06, 02:47 AM	We're not talking about what the spells are MOST thematically linked to, just that they're overarcingly related by a theme. Horrid Wilting does damage like a fireball, that doesn't mean it's similar from a thematic perspective. Yes, individual spells might be similar to spells from other schools, but they still all have a common theme to their home school.But it's not necessarily the common theme that a given character might want to emphasize. That's not what we were talking about though. I was responding to your statement that thematic matching isn't necessarily a good thing, and I don't see anything from the above example that explains that statement.Ah, sorry, misread the objection. Anyway, how could I give an example? I'm simply putting forth than a given character might not want his spells to thematically match, and we shouldn't force it upon him if we don't have balance concerns about it (and I don't see any reason why it would be going overboard to let him pick his perfected spells where he will). There is much more powergaming (and straight power, which you just conceded) involved in being able to pick specific spells rather then pick a school. There are 8 schools to choose from vs., what? 1000 spells from all the suppliments and texts available? Even if you go for the power schools such as conjuration or evocation you're losing out by getting restricted from other schools, a balancing effect, rather then just picking whatever spells you want and accruing benefits without any drawbacks.There's more power, as well as more choices, but this doesn't necessarily mean less powergaming. You still have to pick your school carefully, and you can still pick it thinking about power. But again, why should the class take this option away? There's nothing wrong with powergaming. The problem I have with this is, in part, your assumption that attacking the spellcaster's notes is equivalent to putting a rogue in a tomb full of liches. The former is justifiable and good strategy, which any character with a weapon and decent combat ability can utilize - and probably should when placed in that situation. The latter is bad encounter design on the DM's part.No, the latter is something that'll happen every so often. The former should just be able to happen every so often too. As well to say that having an enemy sunder the fighter's sword is like putting an enchanter up against a room full of gelatinous cubes. If a combat type makes it past the blockers and to the caster, you'd better believe that he's going to go after the caster's primary strength.? In a way you've sort of dug yourself into a pit here, because you just spent 3 posts talking about how much of a threat the caster faces from sunders and the like, but you're not willing to concede that this might be an even bigger problem.? At least with an ability tree that creates a highly durable spellbook, the caster faces less of a chance of losing it (fairly easily) to every random encounter, and being knocked out of the game for a full day.Well, he wouldn't be knocked out. He could still use his spellbook if he wanted to take a bigger risk, or he could just cast Perfected Spells or off scrolls and the ilk. Secondly, you mention making extra copies of his notes.As a possibility, yes. How would this work, mechanically, especially since earlier you were talking about having him update them every morning. Can he make five copies? Ten? Does he have to update them all? Do you actually expect him to have notes for his entire spellbook, potentially hundreds of pages, and yet he can still make modifications every morning within 15 minutes?Why would it take the same amount of time? And, in any case, these casting notes would not be free, just not all that expensive.
Milo HoBo 12-01-06, 03:47 AM	OK, I finally got some time to take a look at this. Sorry for taking so long...Yeah, this thread exploded. I'm curious about the reference to looking at a scroll. Are you saying here that a book mage can cast a spell using a scroll without actually casting from the scroll (thus consuming it)? This is an interesting idea if so, but I wonder if it works mechanically. Wizards cannot memorize off of scrolls, and I believe they specifically mention that this isn't possible in the scroll description. Also, you might want to specifically mention that looking up the spell is part of the full round action.Yes, however, I'm thinking of making it at a spellcraft check, just as a wizard would have to do to prepare a spell out of a unfamiliar spellbook.You need to edit the last sentence, since the book mage no longer gets one spell per level. Also, you should say explicitly that casting a perfected spell burns one slot of the same level from the book caster's daily allotment (unless this isn't the case)I'll try to do that soon.I'm not sure that I like this. For one thing, it means that other spellcasters cannot copy spells from a book mage. This reduces their versitility to an extent. There's nothing wrong with requiring them to carry a few books with them. By the time that it will really matter, they'll have some decent storage options anyway.Look at the (as yet un-edited) flavor of post 3. Wizards can copy their book, just as Mages can copy Wizard books. Allowing a spell to take up 1 page is just so that they can realistically read and cast a spell that quickly, basically without having to flip pages whilst doing it.This is a nice idea. If you want to give some additional power to the book caster, why not up his saves to spells in his casting specialization at higher levels.I think I'll do that.You should edit this to explicitly mention it is a +1 bonus at 5th level.Damn, more editing.Another option you have here is that Spell Mastery can only apply to his perfected spells. Either way, I'd have it apply to one or the other. Get into both and it becomes too complicated.That doesn't make sense. WHy would his perfected spell need spell mastery? Perfected spells don't require a spellbook, and that is all that spell mastery does for a mage. It only makes sense to apply it to non-perfected spells.This is needless. Spells only take up one page in the book caster's spellbook, so all it will cost the mage is the price of ink. Even if you change that aspect of the caster's abilities, it will still become nothing more then a nuisance and light drain on the caster's resources. It makes far more sense to just allow the caster to cast non-perfected spells after a full round action to recall the spell. Since this aspect of the class' abilities is akin to wizard memorization it doesn't make sense to place a sorcerer-like burden on them. They will just end up not using metamagic for these spells.I think that you're right. Does anyone have any objections.Anyway, that's my current opinion on the class. I would also think about re-engineering the perfection levels a little bit, maybe combining some of those bonuses under one umbrella term and ticking it up every few levels. -SteveWhat about free silences and stills? That's the direction I'm planning to take it. Make the spells so inate that they become almost like spell-like abilities.Here's an idea. Keep the spellbook the same as the wizard's spellbook, but allow the Mage to create notebooks of Casting Notes. He can cast off of either book, but the casting notes are simple and cheap to make, and he can afford to lose them occasionally; maybe they need to be updated each morning, too, so losing the spellbook is still a big deal.I think that I understand. THis way, loss of the notes hurts the mage, but not as badly as a spellbook. A mage can also use scrolls, spell mastery, or just stick to Perfected spells. However, I'll try to figure out exactly how to do this spell notes thing. It will probably cost a feat.As for Perfected Spells, I'd change them to "Prepared Spells" and let the Mage change them each morning.I like the idea of the spells becoming incate, not just practiced.I also see no reason to force him to specialize. Remove that part, or leave it in the same as with the Wizard, and let him pick Perfected Spells from anything in his book.I've thought about how I would do this, give me an idea on how to bring this in line with a wizard, powerwise, and I'll try to implement it. Wow, this thread exploded. Tell me the thoughts about Perfected Spells becoming (slowly throughout her career) Silenced and Stilled, like the Sudden Metamagic Feats, for free. Oh, and the thing with Wish and Limited Wish, can't happen. You cannot specialize in Universal Magic, therefore it cannot be a Perfected Spell of any Mage.
Subversive 12-01-06, 11:25 AM	Wow, this thread exploded. Heh It mostly exploded because of the raging debate between blaintog and me. I'll be replying at some point this afternoon when I get off of work. One question to you, however. Is it your intent to somewhat lower the powerlevel of the average wizard with this character class? -Steve
Subversive 12-02-06, 02:10 AM	Anyway, how could I give an example? I'm simply putting forth than a given character might not want his spells to thematically match, and we shouldn't force it upon him if we don't have balance concerns about it (and I don't see any reason why it would be going overboard to let him pick his perfected spells where he will). There's more power, as well as more choices, but this doesn't necessarily mean less powergaming. You still have to pick your school carefully, and you can still pick it thinking about power. But again, why should the class take this option away? There's nothing wrong with powergaming. Ok, let's change focus of our discussion to the overall power of the class. As the class currently stands compared to a wizard, it gains a high increase in versatility and adaptability, as well as increased power using, or facing against, a select number of spells. In exchange, the class faces an increased casting time on most of its spells, a reduction in overall number of spells learnable due to their specialization, and a slight reduction in staying power. This last weakness is largely eclipsed by the increased casting time, which means the caster is unlikely to cast as many spells in a single combat. So really we're looking at sacrificing casting speed some of the time and a reduction in overall spell access, which - considering the sheer breadth of spells the class has access to at any given moment - is not much of a detriment at all. For the purposes of this debase, I'm not including the caster's reliability on a book, scroll, or spellnotes-whatever, since we haven't settled that below. So what happens if you give the class access to any spell for his preferred slot and remove the school specialization casting restrictions? First: a huge jump in spell options at any given time. Second: the only weakness the class really faces now is a increase in casting time that isn't even always there. Third: the caster can chose his preferred spells from any school, allowing a further jump in effectiveness with access to spell combinations he would not have had were these spells limited to one school (timestop/gate/forcecage, anyone?). So my question is, if the wizard is already seen as overpowered, why are you trying to make a related class that is moreso? No, the latter is something that'll happen every so often. The former should just be able to happen every so often too. That doesn't really make much sense. The former is a valid game tactic which any DM worth his salt would take advantage of in combat should the opportunity arise. The later is just being sadistic by placing the player in an unfairly designed encounter. Well, he wouldn't be knocked out. He could still use his spellbook if he wanted to take a bigger risk, or he could just cast Perfected Spells or off scrolls and the ilk. My points are these: 1. Many opponents that a party face can use sunder/disarm, and have the intelligence to do so. 2. Most opponents that a party faces are not specifically geared around sunder or disarm in terms of feats and benefitting equipment. The times a party might face one optomized in such a manner would not occur often. They represent a rare threat. 3. However, sunder and disarm as combat choices are valid game tactics, and are no more unfair to use against this character then they are when used to attack a fighter's sword or a cleric's shield. If the opportunity arises for an opponent to use those tactics and strongly reduce the party's effectiveness, smart tactics by the DM dictate their use. Anything else is softballing the party. 4. The book-mage class, as you have proposed it, still has some strong vulnerabilities to sunder and disarm - moreso to sunder - both in terms that it stands to lose its primary class ability to these tactics for a prolonged time period, and that it is less able to defend against these tactics than a front line or support class (worst BaB, lowest Str, lowest AC). 5. Casting notes, as you have proposed them, leave questions - discussed below and in earlier posts - as to their mechanics, and how they would be implemented for the class 6. Given these factors, it seems better that the class gain high spellbook durability/recoverability as a class feature then rely on casting notes that leave to caster more vulnerable to long-term disruption in a large number of combat situations, and introduce a whole new structure of rules. Alternately, one could give the class spellcasting notes with high durability as a class feature. However this does not seem to mesh thematically with the quick and easily created nature of the notes as they have been proposed. Furthermore, the more permanent you make the notes, the more they start to appear like the spellbook they set out to replace. Those are my primary points, and I hope you'll respond to them as a whole. Why would it take the same amount of time? And, in any case, these casting notes would not be free, just not all that expensive. That hasn't really answered the problems I've posed. You've proposed a class feature, and are defending it, but haven't addressed these questions of feasability. -Steve
Subversive 12-02-06, 03:11 AM	Yes, however, I'm thinking of making it at a spellcraft check, just as a wizard would have to do to prepare a spell out of a unfamiliar spellbook. It's an interesting idea, but seems somewhat redundant to the spellbook (or spell-notes, however you decide to proceed), which takes up less room and fills the same role. I'm also seriously concerned about balance issues with this. There's a reason that wizards can't copy spells off of scrolls without triggering them. Look at the (as yet un-edited) flavor of post 3. Wizards can copy their book, just as Mages can copy Wizard books. Allowing a spell to take up 1 page is just so that they can realistically read and cast a spell that quickly, basically without having to flip pages whilst doing it. The problem with post 3 is that it doesn't relate to Core Content. It's your own ideas on how to do things, and actually alters some aspects of how magic in D&D is designed. You're sort of saying that a sorcerer's spells exist in the weave to be plucked out; that somewhere out in space, there are Leomund's Tiny Huts floating around waiting for a sorcerer to move them here. Scrolls and spells are formulas, each representing an arcanist's method of manipulating the weave. From the PH, page 178: "To record an arcane spell in written form, a character uses complex notation that describes the magical forces involved in the spell. The notation constitutes a universal arcane language (my emphasis) that wizards have discovered, not invented." You're drawing equivalency between a 1 page formula and a 9 page formula, and saying that each class can understand the other's method. Well, why aren't wizards making 1 page formulas in their spellbooks then? If you're worried about the length of time to look up a multi-page spell, I wouldn't really. There's a lot that can happen in a single round. With enough skill, a rogue can select the proper tools and pop open a good or even amazing lock as part of a full round action. Speed reading through nine pages of text to recall a wish spell at similarly high levels doesn't seem beyond that to me. WHy would his perfected spell need spell mastery? Perfected spells don't require a spellbook, and that is all that spell mastery does for a mage. It only makes sense to apply it to non-perfected spells. Oh, I misunderstood the nature of the perfected spells. My apoligies I think that you're right. Does anyone have any objections. Not me. :D What about free silences and stills? That's the direction I'm planning to take it. Make the spells so inate that they become almost like spell-like abilities.I think that I understand. I don't know. To be honest, the class is pretty damn well balanced as it is, and doesn't need too much. I'd be careful of power creep, and - despite my suggestion of increased saves to the caster's school - you want to be careful not to outshine the standard specialist wizard too much at his own game. And yes, I realize that the book-mage gets less spells with those benefits. :) THis way, loss of the notes hurts the mage, but not as badly as a spellbook. A mage can also use scrolls, spell mastery, or just stick to Perfected spells. However, I'll try to figure out exactly how to do this spell notes thing. It will probably cost a feat. Personally, I don't know if I like the idea, for reasons listed in my last post. I hope you will follow our debate and draw a conclusion afterwards I like the idea of the spells becoming innate, not just practiced.I've thought about how I would do this, give me an idea on how to bring this in line with a wizard, powerwise, and I'll try to implement it. Again, I don't really think they need much more. The class has a good balance working for it, and a limited selection of spells that receive extra benefits. Tell me the thoughts about Perfected Spells becoming (slowly throughout her career) Silenced and Stilled, like the Sudden Metamagic Feats, for free. Personally speaking, I like the idea of the perfected spells (and the caster's saves against those schools) getting better penetration, but this is an interesting option also, and too much penetration will make that aspect of the class too powerful. Consider given them a onetime boost, and then giving them the free feats. Oh, and the thing with Wish and Limited Wish, can't happen. You cannot specialize in Universal Magic, therefore it cannot be a Perfected Spell of any Mage. Yes, as it stands with the class that is true. But Blaine and I were debating whether the caster should be specialized at all, or allowed to choose spells from any school.
Subversive 12-03-06, 11:53 AM	Bump-a-dump
Milo HoBo 12-03-06, 01:59 PM	Ok, let's change focus of our discussion to the overall power of the class. As the class currently stands compared to a wizard, it gains a high increase in versatility and adaptability, as well as increased power using, or facing against, a select number of spells. In exchange, the class faces an increased casting time on most of its spells, a reduction in overall number of spells learnable due to their specialization, and a slight reduction in staying power. This last weakness is largely eclipsed by the increased casting time, which means the caster is unlikely to cast as many spells in a single combat. So really we're looking at sacrificing casting speed some of the time and a reduction in overall spell access, which - considering the sheer breadth of spells the class has access to at any given moment - is not much of a detriment at all. For the purposes of this debase, I'm not including the caster's reliability on a book, scroll, or spellnotes-whatever, since we haven't settled that below.Hold on a second. 20 perfected spells were far less than the number that sorcerers know, but 11 is miniscule. So, weaker than a Sorcerer at spontaneous access, and slower than a Wizard at getting together alot of spells. The bonus is actually being somewhat capable of trying. What you are suggesting (I think, undertones are hard to differentiate in text) is that the Mage should use only her Perfected Spells during combat. This means a one trick pony, whose tricks are all from the same school. That is hardly as powerful as one would think. They will probably be sacrificing casting speed most of the time if they don't want to be a one trick pony. Now, they will have a plethera of spells at any given moment (well, two moments really) but its risky business and takes up your actions. This is where the real power of the class is, however, you basically cut your own impact in half. At some point it may be better to use scrolls that waste the time to form a spell.So what happens if you give the class access to any spell for his preferred slot and remove the school specialization casting restrictions? First: a huge jump in spell options at any given time. Second: the only weakness the class really faces now is a increase in casting time that isn't even always there. Third: the caster can chose his preferred spells from any school, allowing a further jump in effectiveness with access to spell combinations he would not have had were these spells limited to one school (timestop/gate/forcecage, anyone?). So my question is, if the wizard is already seen as overpowered, why are you trying to make a related class that is moreso?I'm not sure I know what a Preferred Slot is. I'm going to make a guess and say that you mean a 'Perfected Spell's' known slot. Which is why I haven't done it yet. It would be amazingly hard to balance that. However, if you want what you have described, there is the Sorcerer who carries too many scrolls for his own good.My points are these: 1. Many opponents that a party face can use sunder/disarm, and have the intelligence to do so. 2. Most opponents that a party faces are not specifically geared around sunder or disarm in terms of feats and benefitting equipment. The times a party might face one optomized in such a manner would not occur often. They represent a rare threat. 3. However, sunder and disarm as combat choices are valid game tactics, and are no more unfair to use against this character then they are when used to attack a fighter's sword or a cleric's shield. If the opportunity arises for an opponent to use those tactics and strongly reduce the party's effectiveness, smart tactics by the DM dictate their use. Anything else is softballing the party. 4. The book-mage class, as you have proposed it, still has some strong vulnerabilities to sunder and disarm - moreso to sunder - both in terms that it stands to lose its primary class ability to these tactics for a prolonged time period, and that it is less able to defend against these tactics than a front line or support class (worst BaB, lowest Str, lowest AC). 5. Casting notes, as you have proposed them, leave questions - discussed below and in earlier posts - as to their mechanics, and how they would be implemented for the class 6. Given these factors, it seems better that the class gain high spellbook durability/recoverability as a class feature then rely on casting notes that leave to caster more vulnerable to long-term disruption in a large number of combat situations, and introduce a whole new structure of rules. 1. Yes, but this is what tank/meatshields are for. If you are in melee, then something has already gone horribly, horribly wrong. 2. Very true. 3. I agree, however, see one. In addition, opponents want to keep the left over equiptment for selling too. They don't want to destroy it, with rare exceptions. 4. If you go into battle, you should have a meatshield/tank. Also, you should probably give your spellbook the upgrades presented in the Complete Arcane. These are things left up to the player to do. I consider it the same thing as them putting new spells in there or a fighter upgrading his armor. There are other options (Spell Mastery) but it is up to the player to take care of his equiptment. 5. I think that if it did become an option, it would end up being a feat or even feat chain. I'm still not sure I like the idea as a whole. 6. This is up to the player to take care of. Remember that most opponents know that Wizards have alot of cash and are willing to pay for spellbooks. They don't want to destroy something that they can sell for fat cash. Alternately, one could give the class spellcasting notes with high durability as a class feature. However this does not seem to mesh thematically with the quick and easily created nature of the notes as they have been proposed. Furthermore, the more permanent you make the notes, the more they start to appear like the spellbook they set out to replace.I agree.Those are my primary points, and I hope you'll respond to them as a whole.I think that I have. It's an interesting idea, but seems somewhat redundant to the spellbook (or spell-notes, however you decide to proceed), which takes up less room and fills the same role. I'm also seriously concerned about balance issues with this. There's a reason that wizards can't copy spells off of scrolls without triggering them.I don't think that I really see the difference between using a spellbook or a scroll as a focus. Both are worth alot of time and money to a Mage, both are at risk when being pulled out. The main difference is that the Scroll might not be from a Mage's usual repertoire, hence the spellcraft check. The scroll is more vunerable in combat, but the Spellbook is likely worth more. I think that it balances out. Wizard's can't do it because it would be a huge boost in power, however, it wouldn't really boost a Mage's power to allow it. (Please correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not a stubborn person.)The problem with post 3 is that it doesn't relate to Core Content. It's your own ideas on how to do things, and actually alters some aspects of how magic in D&D is designed. You're sort of saying that a sorcerer's spells exist in the weave to be plucked out; that somewhere out in space, there are Leomund's Tiny Huts floating around waiting for a sorcerer to move them here.I view the Weave similar to a huge block of programing code. Lines of code represent what will happen if they are triggered. It is not that a Leomund's Tiny Hut is floating around, it the potential energy organized to create a Leomund's Tiny Hut that is floating around. I guess I should give up on the reflavoring of the classes to make room for the Mage.You're drawing equivalency between a 1 page formula and a 9 page formula, and saying that each class can understand the other's method. Well, why aren't wizards making 1 page formulas in their spellbooks then?It isn't useful to them. A Mage's spellbook is cooridinates to a pre-made spell. They are adept at reaching through the Weave and activating that 'code'. Wizard's aren't. They create their own 'code'. So, they can study a Mage's spellbook and figure out how to recreate the spell's, but the coordinates themselves are a means to an end for a Wizard.If you're worried about the length of time to look up a multi-page spell, I wouldn't really. There's a lot that can happen in a single round. With enough skill, a rogue can select the proper tools and pop open a good or even amazing lock as part of a full round action. Speed reading through nine pages of text to recall a wish spell at similarly high levels doesn't seem beyond that to me.Okay, it will probably be changed then. The part about using two hands to do it bothers me, however.Oh, I misunderstood the nature of the perfected spells. My apoligiesIt's alright. That is why I changed terminology. I don't know. To be honest, the class is pretty damn well balanced as it is, and doesn't need too much. I'd be careful of power creep, and - despite my suggestion of increased saves to the caster's school - you want to be careful not to outshine the standard specialist wizard too much at his own game. And yes, I realize that the book-mage gets less spells with those benefits. :)Alright. I just think that it goes well with the flavor. What if I take away other things like the bonuses to caster level and such?Again, I don't really think they need much more. The class has a good balance working for it, and a limited selection of spells that receive extra benefits.I want Perfected Spell's to live up to the name.Personally speaking, I like the idea of the perfected spells (and the caster's saves against those schools) getting better penetration, but this is an interesting option also, and too much penetration will make that aspect of the class too powerful. Consider given them a onetime boost, and then giving them the free feats.I keep trying to pull this class in different directions while remembering that certain benefits cater to some schools more than others. However, Stilled and Silenced are great for everyone.Yes, as it stands with the class that is true. But Blaine and I were debating whether the caster should be specialized at all, or allowed to choose spells from any school.It'll be near impossible to balance that well. You could just take out the Perfected spells, replace benefits from Perfected spells to bonus feats at 5th 10th 15th and 20th level, and have access to all schools. No pure spontaneous spells, just semi-spontaneous access to all. Maybe give them back 4 spells per spell-level, I don't know. P.S. What do you think about the class features Perfectly Silent, Perfectly Still, and Embodiment of Perfection? Too much, not enough? Should I start taking things away? If so, what should be taken away? I also edited the FAQs.
Subversive 12-05-06, 12:41 AM	Hold on a second. 20 perfected spells were far less than the number that sorcerers know, but 11 is miniscule. So, weaker than a Sorcerer at spontaneous access, and slower than a Wizard at getting together alot of spells. The bonus is actually being somewhat capable of trying. What you are suggesting (I think, undertones are hard to differentiate in text) is that the Mage should use only her Perfected Spells during combat. This means a one trick pony, whose tricks are all from the same school. That is hardly as powerful as one would think. They will probably be sacrificing casting speed most of the time if they don't want to be a one trick pony. Nope nope nope. Not what I meant. I was really just discussing the relative strengths and weaknesses of the class, which we essentially agree on. The class sacrifices speed for versatility though when needed is able to cast a selection of spells as normal speeds. Given the right spell selection of perfeced spells, those spells might be seen often in combat, so it's reasonable to say that he loses speed "some of the time." Now, they will have a plethera of spells at any given moment (well, two moments really) but its risky business and takes up your actions. This is where the real power of the class is, however, you basically cut your own impact in half. At some point it may be better to use scrolls that waste the time to form a spell. We're in agreement here. I'm not sure I know what a Preferred Slot is. I'm going to make a guess and say that you mean a 'Perfected Spell's' known slot. Which is why I haven't done it yet. It would be amazingly hard to balance that. However, if you want what you have described, there is the Sorcerer who carries too many scrolls for his own good. Meant perfected. Typo. Understand, I'm in favor of the current setup. I think allowing a full selection of spells for this class aspect is unbalancing, far superior - even - to a sorcerer loaded with scrolls. 3. I agree, however, see one. In addition, opponents want to keep the left over equiptment for selling too. They don't want to destroy it, with rare exceptions. That's not going to factor into most NPC behaviors, similarly to how Disjunction is far superior against PCs then used by them. Most DM's will not have their NPCs view the combat as a chance to get swag. They view it as a challenge to the PCs 4. If you go into battle, you should have a meatshield/tank. Also, you should probably give your spellbook the upgrades presented in the Complete Arcane. These are things left up to the player to do. I consider it the same thing as them putting new spells in there or a fighter upgrading his armor. There are other options (Spell Mastery) but it is up to the player to take care of his equiptment. Well, I actually do agree with Blaine that the exposed spellbook represents a big threat to the class. Even a failed save on an area effect spell can cost the player thousands of gold and unrecoverable spells. It's even worse for this class because they can't even copy the spells that they've memorized into a replacement book - since they haven't memorized any spells. This aspect of the class is a huge weakness, and should be addressed in some way - though the upgrades in Complete Arcane represent a good place to start. Maybe the class can be given the ability to literally construct its own spellbook. Maybe the spellbook construction can be a supernatural ability, like how a runecaster scribes runes. Maybe - because you said this was a concern - at higher levels the book can float next to the caster in a manner similar to Tenser's Floating Disk, freeing both the caster's hands. I think this is a preferrable option to a spellnotes feat chain. I don't think that I really see the difference between using a spellbook or a scroll as a focus. Both are worth alot of time and money to a Mage, both are at risk when being pulled out. The main difference is that the Scroll might not be from a Mage's usual repertoire, hence the spellcraft check. The scroll is more vunerable in combat, but the Spellbook is likely worth more. I think that it balances out. Wizard's can't do it because it would be a huge boost in power, however, it wouldn't really boost a Mage's power to allow it. (Please correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not a stubborn person.) I'm not horribly opposed to it, but I like keeping the spellbook central to the concept of the class, and this risks diluting it I view the Weave similar to a huge block of programing code. Lines of code represent what will happen if they are triggered. It is not that a Leomund's Tiny Hut is floating around, it the potential energy organized to create a Leomund's Tiny Hut that is floating around. I guess I should give up on the reflavoring of the classes to make room for the Mage. It isn't useful to them. A Mage's spellbook is cooridinates to a pre-made spell. They are adept at reaching through the Weave and activating that 'code'. Wizard's aren't. They create their own 'code'. So, they can study a Mage's spellbook and figure out how to recreate the spell's, but the coordinates themselves are a means to an end for a Wizard. The problem I see with it is that you're basically forcing what amounts to a houserule on to all arcane classes. I'd keep it general and stick with the source material. Okay, it will probably be changed then. The part about using two hands to do it bothers me, however. Hovering spellbook. I think I mentioned it above. You even have it in the picture you included. :) Alright. I just think that it goes well with the flavor. What if I take away other things like the bonuses to caster level and such? Actually, I think that a bonus to caster levels might be less abusable then increases to DC. I don't know. I think the key will be not having too much of one or the other, and balancing the two improvements out. I want Perfected Spell's to live up to the name. I keep trying to pull this class in different directions while remembering that certain benefits cater to some schools more than others. However, Stilled and Silenced are great for everyone. I think I agree with you here. I'll look over the whole chain of progression and try to come up with some suggestions. It'll be near impossible to balance that well. You could just take out the Perfected spells, replace benefits from Perfected spells to bonus feats at 5th 10th 15th and 20th level, and have access to all schools. No pure spontaneous spells, just semi-spontaneous access to all. Maybe give them back 4 spells per spell-level, I don't know. P.S. What do you think about the class features Perfectly Silent, Perfectly Still, and Embodiment of Perfection? Too much, not enough? Should I start taking things away? If so, what should be taken away? I also edited the FAQs. I think it's a bad idea to question yourself too much. Try coming up with two or three different builds and see which one you like the best. I'll give the progression a shot too when I've got a little more time. -Steve
Milo HoBo 12-06-06, 01:54 AM	Perfectly Silent At 7th level, a Mage has become so in tune with her Pefected Spells that she may now apply Silent Spell to any Perfected Spell below her highest Spell level without an increase in the spell's spell slot level. She must still take a full-round action to do so. At 13th level, this may be applyed with Perfectly Still to spells at least two lower than than the highest level spell availble to a Mage. Perfectly Still At 13th level, A Mage has become so in tune with her Perfected Spells that she may now apply Still Spell to any Perfected Spell at least one level below her highest Spell level without an increase to the spell's spell slot level. She must still take a full-round action to do so. This may be applyed with Perfectly Silent to spells at least two lower than than the highest level spell availble to a Mage. Embodiment of Perfection Perfected Spells that utilize Perfectly Silent, Perfectly Still, or both may now be cast at their normal casting time. A Mage still cannot cast her highest level spells with Perfectly Silent, Perfectly Still, or even her second highest spells with both applied. In addition, Perfected Spells altered by metamagic no longer increase the casting time. This allows Perfected Spells to utilize Quicken Spell without the aid of feats like Instant Metamagic. I tried to keep these in line. I think that I've succeded because: a. This only applies to a maximum of 11 spells at 20th level. b. A Mage may still only apply Perfectly Still, Perfectly Silent, or both to 8th or 7th level or lower spells. c. Until 20th level a Mage is imposed a casting time penalty to casting Perfected Spells altered by these features (further penalizing casting time). However, I'm worried about Embodiment of Perfection because it removes the need for feats like Imediate Metamagic which the Mage may have already purchased. I think it's a bad idea to question yourself too much. Try coming up with two or three different builds and see which one you like the best. ...The problem with that is that I'm in the middle of finals at the moment.
the truthseeker 12-08-06, 10:34 PM	Forming a spell requires a full-round action to concentrate on the spell which provokes an attack of opportunity. This attack of opportunity may be avoided by making a concentration check equal to 15 + the spell level of the spell being formed. In order to form a spell the Mage must (usually) be viewing a scribed version of the spell in a spellbook or scroll. If she is successful in forming the spell, it forms in the Mage's mind at the end of her full-round action and can be cast (requiring a standard, swift, immediate, etc. action) at it's normal casting time when you have the next available action; at this point the spell slot is deducted from her total. If the Mage does not cast the readied spell within a number of minutes equal to her level, it fades from her mind as if cast. After reviewing all the replies and thinking how she is vunerable to an AOO as well as having a bullseye on her spellbook, how about optioning it up a little? "While the mage casts from her spellbook, she is considered having the 'escew materials' feat. All the feat's restrictions still apply. " Treat the spellbook like a "spell component pouch" or "spell focus." I can't tell you how FEW beings (NPC or PC) target the SCP or get the waveoff of how "difficult" it is guarded. Just because it is in hand doesn't mean it isn't guarded. Have it "bound" to the person just like any other item. Have spells researched that allow you to view items in a pocket dimension with a viewing area (like rope trick.) Do NOT remove the spellbook in my opinion as this is the whole character of the class. Having one hand used via a "spell focus" works. And a levetating spellbook? That's just outright appropriate assuming the class ever does have the time to touch the book (even a free action means they have to get to the book of course) and recall the spell (perfected spells and mastery spells exempt, but the concentration time for non perfected spells [included mastery spells] is not.) And if any wizard is stupid to take their original spellbook instead of several traveling spellbooks...well, this is why spells like Leomund's secret chest were invented so you DON'T. Recognize Perfection At 3rd level a Mage gains a +2 bonus on Spellcraft checks to identify spells that she herself has perfected. Small problem: If the bonus to spellcraft applies, then the PC knows what group of spells it belongs to even when they FAIL the check. Try ammending this to the school(s) of magic, just like a specialist. Overall, a fantastic idea for a class that makes Mystic Theuerge look like a mistake for the REAL arcane generalist willing to sacrifice a bit of their abilities for their greater arcane focus. I would allow certain feats PrC and abilities available for specialists to work with the class' abilities as if they were a wizard specialist (for example, Complete Mage Master Specialist P 70.) Hope this helped, Josh R.
Pitiless_Interfector 02-17-07, 01:04 PM	How would this feat interact with the class?: Internal Magic [General] Prerequisites: Still Spell, Silent Spell, Eschew Materials, Nonverbal Spell Benefits: When applying Still Spell to a spell, you can also apply Silent Spell at the same time, or vice versa, with no additional adjustment to the spell's level or casting time (the spell level still increases by a minimum of 1). In addition, you need not provide any focus component of 50 gp or less in the process of casting the spell. Normal: Applying Still Spell and Silent Spell to a spell raises its level by 2. If a spell requires an arcane focus, you must provide it, or the spell fails.
technodemon 07-16-07, 11:23 PM	Well I really like the class so far but there is something you totally missed and I am surprised the others here did not see it. Where these info for the class? Adventurers: Characteristics: Alignment: Background: Races: Other Classes: Role: Abilities: Class Skills Skill Points at 1st Level: Skill Points at Each Additional Level: