Post/Author/DateTime	Post
CrimsonRyoko 03-08-04, 03:21 PM	Ok, i just started in a campaign last week, and i made up my "Super Fire Evoker" character, who is going for Elemental Savant Fire, and Archmage. Anyway, i was wondering if it seemed fair to allow a character to learn all of their energy based damage spells to be a specific energy base - this case Fire. Simply replacing Fire damage in spell descriptions would be enough, maybe some small changes to the way it goes off, but overall keeping the same spells intention but making them fire. I have heard mixed opinions on the board, but i was wondering a group consensus if this is fair or not. A Wizard gets them free each level regardless if they are specialized or not, and my char is fire based all over, so why would he learn another type of spell? (i know i cant kill everything with fire, but my char swears by it :))
Vorpal Warhammer 03-08-04, 03:24 PM	If you take the Energy Substitution feat, you can do exactly what you're describing. The metamagic feat doesn't increase the spell level, so you can just prepare all your spells with Energy Sub: Fire in the morning.
CrimsonRyoko 03-08-04, 03:25 PM	Yeah, i know that, its a pre req for ES, but i was wondering about just learning them all as fire in the first place. Meh moot point i suppose. . . .
Heron_Marked_Blade 03-08-04, 03:27 PM	Originally posted by CrimsonRyoko Meh moot point i suppose. . . . Particularly if you're taking Mastery of Elements as an Archmage...
kreynolds 03-08-04, 03:27 PM	I'd certainly allow the character to research his own versions of commonplace spells, such as a a fire-based versions of lightning bolt, cone of cold, etc, etc, as detailed in the DMG. I wouldn't let a character just convert dozens of spells from one energy type to another for free. I think the researching of new spells is appropriate for something like this.
smrtgmp 03-08-04, 03:28 PM	Originally posted by CrimsonRyoko Yeah, i know that, its a pre req for ES, but i was wondering about just learning them all as fire in the first place. Meh moot point i suppose. . . . I wouldnt have a problem with this. Especially since fire is the most easily resited type of energy. For a theme based character such as this, I dont think the feat would be necessary.
NorthSaber 03-08-04, 04:51 PM	I agree - the feat wouldn't be necessary, but the character could only get the "fiery" versions as the two free spells / level, or as spells he researches himself. He shouldn't be able to find a "Melf's Fire Arrow" as a scroll... Or he could, but he shouldn't expect to.
smrtgmp 03-08-04, 05:09 PM	Originally posted by NorthSaber ... but the character could only get the "fiery" versions as the two free spells / level, or as spells he researches himself. He shouldn't be able to find a "Melf's Fire Arrow" as a scroll... Or he could, but he shouldn't expect to. Agreed.
Edymnion 03-08-04, 08:46 PM	Yup, I see no problems with researching spells to be fire based from the start. The feat is really there for flexibility, giving you the option of casting the spell as either or, depending on situation. By making the spell fire in the first place, you remove that choice, and hence the benefit of the feat. But, given your options, I wouldn't learn them as fire spells. Energy Substitution is LA +0, and as a Wizard you don't have the full round casting time like a Sorcerer, so you can simply memorize them as fire spells every morning while still keeping your flexbility should you need it at some point in the future. You can still learn spells as Fire only for those which can't use Energy Sub, however.