Post/Author/DateTime	Post
cato 06-12-07, 06:19 PM	Can I use my spellcraft skill to identify a wizards' spells if I play a druid/priest?
Mastel 06-12-07, 06:23 PM	Why not, magic is magic.
cato 06-12-07, 06:33 PM	ye but how can i identify a spell thats not even in my spell list, how would i know what a druid specific spell looks like? especially considering divine spells differ at casting.
Deathmond 06-12-07, 06:37 PM	Because that's how the rules work. Spellcraft doesn't say you can only ID spells on your class list, so you aren't limited to only your list.
ShinAkuma2 06-12-07, 07:07 PM	ye but how can i identify a spell thats not even in my spell list, how would i know what a druid specific spell looks like? ...Because you took ranks in Spellcraft. That's what the skill is. You study about magic, and one of the things you learn is what the components of spells look like.
cato 06-12-07, 07:08 PM	erm, so why does a mage get - 5 to identify spells of his opposing school while he get no - to identify druid spells :p did he anti study the opposing school :p?
Mastel 06-12-07, 07:50 PM	erm, so why does a mage get - 5 to identify spells of his opposing school while he get no - to identify druid spells :p did he anti study the opposing school :p? NO, he just never study opposing school. Divine spell are easier to identify then opposing school. When you take rank in spellcraft you study spells & magic effect of all class.
cato 06-12-07, 09:01 PM	So its easier to identify a cure serious wounds from a divine spellcaster than it is to identify the opposing school ? that simply does not make any sense... I get how you mean its the RAW but no way its logical.. Its like saying priests with spellcraft identify wizard spells better than a wizard identifies spells of his opposing school. Since spellcraft has nothing to do with your class, and you learn to identify spells by taking this skill, class features shouldn't matter
ShinAkuma2 06-13-07, 01:15 AM	So its easier to identify a cure serious wounds from a divine spellcaster than it is to identify the opposing school ? that simply does not make any sense... Which part? Is it so strange that a professor of Asian history, with absolutely no background in African history, is better at math than African history? "But history is history, and math is totally unrelated!" Well, yeah, but having studied nothing about African history (or the wizard having studied nothing about his forbidden schools), he's not good at it. He's good at math because this random guy I made up happened to have a math minor.
cato 06-13-07, 07:41 AM	Nvm I guess you dont get it.., its not that its so hard to understand, its that there is no solid logic behind it..
Witch 06-13-07, 07:53 AM	Nvm I guess you dont get it.., its not that its so hard to understand, its that there is no solid logic behind it.. There is solid logic behind it. Forbidden schools are actively ignored. It is a school you have decided not to study at all. Wizards don't actively ignore the study of divine spells.
risner 06-13-07, 08:58 AM	So its easier to identify a cure serious wounds from a divine spellcaster than it is to identify the opposing school ? that simply does not make any sense... Makes sense to me. He considers Divine spells worthy of study, but spells on his prohibited schools are useless and not worthy of study.
jaelis 06-13-07, 09:03 AM	You probably have to assume that divine and arcane magic are more closely related that the rules might otherwise suggest. So when the prospective wizard studies the conjuration school so that he can learn how to cast grease, he also learns a fair bit about how a cleric would cast cure light wounds. But if he's a specialist who neglects conjuration spells, he never learns much about either.
Prince_of_Parkness 06-13-07, 10:23 AM	Makes sense to me. He considers Divine spells worthy of study, but spells on his prohibited schools are useless and not worthy of study. WTH? Why wouldn't a specialist study spells from prohibited school? (If anyone says because he cant learn them i will rip their heap off) i think the same rule should apply. Yes you can identify spells of arcane nature if you are a druid but you take a -5 penalty to it
risner 06-13-07, 11:18 AM	WTH? Why wouldn't a specialist study spells from prohibited school? i think the same rule should apply. Yes you can identify spells of arcane nature if you are a druid but you take a -5 penalty to it Because he doesn't want to study anything in a prohibited school, he made a choice to ignore that school (maybe he thinks people that use that school are useless.) Either way, he chooses to ignore the school, it isn't that he can't study the school. He doesn't want to study it. As for your house rule, feel free to rule that way.
Prince_of_Parkness 06-13-07, 11:36 AM	Because he doesn't want to study anything in a prohibited school, he made a choice to ignore that school (maybe he thinks people that use that school are useless.) Either way, he chooses to ignore the school, it isn't that he can't study the school. He doesn't want to study it. As for your house rule, feel free to rule that way. I just dont find that logical. If I could cast spells as a specialst with a prohibited, wouldn't that make any specialist in the school Im prhibited in my "proffession rival". Wouldn't you go out of your way to at least have basic knowlegde of spells you cant cast? You could argue that they would get a bonus to identify spells from oposite schools. A fighter with an abnormally high Dex but a relativly weak strength who dual wield finnessable weapons would never the less study the advantages and dissadvantages of using 2 handed weapons, even though he would never use one, incase he has one day has to fight one.
jaelis 06-13-07, 11:56 AM	I just dont find that logical. If I could cast spells as a specialst with a prohibited, wouldn't that make any specialist in the school Im prhibited in my "proffession rival". Wouldn't you go out of your way to at least have basic knowlegde of spells you cant cast? You could argue that they would get a bonus to identify spells from oposite schools. The reason the schools are prohibited is because you didn't study those spells. If you did study them, then you could cast them. But then you wouldn't have as much time to study your specialist school, and you wouldn't get those extra spells. And you wouldn't be a specialist. A fighter with an abnormally high Dex but a relativly weak strength who dual wield finnessable weapons would never the less study the advantages and dissadvantages of using 2 handed weapons, even though he would never use one, incase he has one day has to fight one. But if that fighter was dedicating all his time to practicing with and studying finesse weapons in order to get some bonus with them, then he wouldn't have time to learn about 2H weapons.
Knightblde 06-13-07, 11:59 AM	You guys are crazy. The game gives penalties for rewards. IE there has to be a penalty to getting extra spell slots. Part of that penalty is identifing the 'exact' spell from the opposing school. This makes sense in that fact that identifing that spell is required to counterspell it. Therefore a specialist wizard has a harder time countering spells of the opposing school. As for flavor, your logic appears flawed. All spells of the opposing school suffer this penalty, not just arcane spells. If you chose conjuration as a prohibited school then you would suffer a -5 penalty to the spellcraft check if a Wizard, Bard, Paladin, Healer, Cleric, Druid or any other class was to cast it. The fact that it is divine has no bearing on how spellcraft works. This is true of most aspects of D&D. I find that a lot of players seperate these spells a lot more than they should. While I may know how to use a PC very well, I cannot use a MAC at all. It does not mean that a PC and a MAC are very different in nature. If I needed to troubleshoot a MAC I will still start with is it pluged in, is it turned on, is there power to the plug etc. While different they are very much the same. This can also be applied to arcane and divine magic as well. The key response to the OP's statement is that all magic spells are of a school, and the spellcraft check penalty applies to all spells of that school, not just arcane. Happy Gaming!
Prince_of_Parkness 06-13-07, 12:03 PM	The reason the schools are prohibited is because you didn't study those spells. If you did study them, then you could cast them. But then you wouldn't have as much time to study your specialist school, and you wouldn't get those extra spells. And you wouldn't be a specialist. So if a specialist wears a ring of substedance (forgive my awful spelling, im talking bout the ring that reduces the amuont of sleep you need) he could learn magic from prohibited school just by braking an unwritten law of mages that specialists dont study spells from opposite schools because he has more time to study? BTW, that would be a great egde to give a spell casting BBEG...
Prince_of_Parkness 06-13-07, 12:07 PM	But if that fighter was dedicating all his time to practicing with and studying finesse weapons in order to get some bonus with them, then he wouldn't have time to learn about 2H weapons. I fighter wont train 24/7. I think after 6 hours of training even the hero PC's of D&D need to rest. And if he's at a combat ground then theres a high chance there will be someone else there using a 2h weapon while he rests who he can observ.
Prince_of_Parkness 06-13-07, 12:09 PM	ignore this...i wasnt paying attention wen i wrote it
risner 06-13-07, 01:44 PM	So if a specialist wears a ring of substedance he could learn magic from prohibited school just by braking an unwritten No, he couldn't. See that is what you may be having trouble understanding. There isn't anyone there to slap someone for breaking an "unwritten law", it is that the characters (specialist wizards) don't venture outside their schools to the prohibited schools because they choose to limit themselves. You are not playing a specialist wizard if you play him as someone that "wants" to break some unwritten law or as someone who might dabble in the prohibited schools.
Prince_of_Parkness 06-13-07, 04:01 PM	No, he couldn't. See that is what you may be having trouble understanding. There isn't anyone there to slap someone for breaking an "unwritten law", it is that the characters (specialist wizards) don't venture outside their schools to the prohibited schools because they choose to limit themselves. You are not playing a specialist wizard if you play him as someone that "wants" to break some unwritten law or as someone who might dabble in the prohibited schools. But what is stopping them from doing so? Lawful good specialists i understand, but a choatic evil one would dabble in prohibited schools. However, this is beside the point. i mentioned the ring of substenance(?) to counter the point that about the mage not having enough time to study magic from the forbbiden schools. I still dont understand why a mage would know more about divine magic than about prohibited spells. (If you think im a stuborn bastard which i quite possible am, dont waste your time explaining it to me, but if u dont mind wasting your time, id welcome an explanation)
Loki5654 06-13-07, 04:14 PM	But what is stopping them from doing so? Lawful good specialists i understand, but a choatic evil one would dabble in prohibited schools. Ultimately it comes down to "Because the Rules Say So". You can't "dabble" in studying a spell school. You either study it or you don't. By choosing to be a specialist, you have declared "I do not study X school". If you start studying that school, guess what? You are no longer a specialist and forfeit any benefits gained from being a specialist. D&D is like pointilism. If you stare at it too close, all you'll see is dots and you'll miss the big picture.
Prince_of_Parkness 06-13-07, 05:08 PM	D&D is like pointilism. If you stare at it too close, all you'll see is dots and you'll miss the big picture. Thats a good saying, ill quote you on that one.
cato 06-13-07, 05:19 PM	What is seemingly broken is that since someone who doesn't cast spells, and has no spellcasting ability (i.e fighter/barbarian) what so ever knows more about necromantic spells that a wizard that has picked it as his opposing school.. Since spellcraft is irrelevant of your class and your type of casting since spellcasting is similar and since so many people here insist its a stand alone skill, why should you get a penalty for it from your class. If anything a mage should have a higher chance of identifying his opposing school than a barbarian/fighter with spellcraft. Oh and saying that a character might think : Oh its my opposing school I hate it and I am not gonna study it indicates a vow of some sort or utter stupidity on the caster's part.. non of each apply in either case for a character like that.
Vegepygmy 06-13-07, 05:25 PM	What is seemingly broken is that since someone who doesn't cast spells, and has no spellcasting ability (i.e fighter/barbarian) what so ever knows more about necromantic spells that a wizard that has picked it as his opposing school..But a fighter/barbarian doesn't know more about necromantic spells than a specialist wizard opposed to necromancy does unless the fighter/barbarian has at least 1 rank of Spellcraft. In other words, the fighter/barbarian has actually made some effort to study necromantic spells, unlike the specialist wizard. :banghead:
Knightblde 06-13-07, 05:56 PM	What is seemingly broken is that since someone who doesn't cast spells, and has no spellcasting ability (i.e fighter/barbarian) what so ever knows more about necromantic spells that a wizard that has picked it as his opposing school.. Since spellcraft is irrelevant of your class and your type of casting since spellcasting is similar and since so many people here insist its a stand alone skill, why should you get a penalty for it from your class. If anything a mage should have a higher chance of identifying his opposing school than a barbarian/fighter with spellcraft. Oh and saying that a character might think : Oh its my opposing school I hate it and I am not gonna study it indicates a vow of some sort or utter stupidity on the caster's part.. non of each apply in either case for a character like that. Um, yeah, you have proved that this discussion has moved beyond your ability to understand. Let me but it to you this way: A wizard, with ranks in craft weapons, knows more about weapons than the fighter with no ranks in craft weapons. While the fighter can use them much better, the wizard will know more about which ones are in good shape, which ones need work, which ones are masterwork and the like. If my previous post: You guys are crazy. The game gives penalties for rewards. IE there has to be a penalty to getting extra spell slots. Part of that penalty is identifing the 'exact' spell from the opposing school. This makes sense in that fact that identifing that spell is required to counterspell it. Therefore a specialist wizard has a harder time countering spells of the opposing school. does not make sense to you, then I don't know what to tell you.
Shi'ar Morpheus 06-13-07, 06:53 PM	I think you guys got it all wrong... A) When you've been gifted with magic, you don't simply study it. It infuses itself to you, it's a part of your soul. When you're a specialist, you don't just choose to study a particualr scool, you have a natural inclination to it. When you try to study an oppositional school, you're trying to infuse yourself with knowledge that is diametrically opposed to your existence. It's simply harder to grasp, as the symbols, glyphs and gesticulations are counter-intuitive and alien. and B) A wizard could know more about a weapons construction and not be the best wielder of it. Master rifle makers aren't the best snipers and low wage workers on a Dell assembly line aren't the best computer literate.
Vegepygmy 06-13-07, 06:58 PM	A) When you've been gifted with magic, you don't simply study it. It infuses itself to you, it's a part of your soul. When you're a specialist, you don't just choose to study a particualr scool, you have a natural inclination to it. When you try to study an oppositional school, you're trying to infuse yourself with knowledge that is diametrically opposed to your existence. It's simply harder to grasp, as the symbols, glyphs and gesticulations are counter-intuitive and alien.Maybe that's how magic works in your D&D world, but in mine you do "simply study it." And I don't think the rules say either one of us is right or wrong about that. B) A wizard could know more about a weapons construction and not be the best wielder of it. Master rifle makers aren't the best snipers and low wage workers on a Dell assembly line aren't the best computer literate.I believe that was precisely Knightblde's point.
Loki5654 06-13-07, 06:58 PM	I think you guys got it all wrong... A) When you've been gifted with magic, you don't simply study it. It infuses itself to you, it's a part of your soul. When you're a specialist, you don't just choose to study a particualr scool, you have a natural inclination to it. When you try to study an oppositional school, you're trying to infuse yourself with knowledge that is diametrically opposed to your existence. It's simply harder to grasp, as the symbols, glyphs and gesticulations are counter-intuitive and alien. and B) A wizard could know more about a weapons construction and not be the best wielder of it. Master rifle makers aren't the best snipers and low wage workers on a Dell assembly line aren't the best computer literate. That's all fluff. Fluff varies from game to game. The only common frame of reference we have is the RAW. Hence my answer of "The Rules say so". Anything else is subject to individual interpretation.
cato 06-13-07, 07:15 PM	Um, yeah, you have proved that this discussion has moved beyond your ability to understand. does not make sense to you, then I don't know what to tell you. I like your logical claims, but imo your the one who doesn't understand, unlike you though I will refrain from attacking your ability. What you fail to see here, is that spellcraft according to rules and what you have said so far is a stand alone skill irrelevant to your class. I.e You could theoretically be a mage with no skills in spellcraft what so ever. Hence when a warrior gets the skill, it shouldn't differ at all from when a mage gets it. They both spend the same skill points which translates into study time on the skill so they should both have the ability to understand the same amount of schools spells. I hope you get it now instead of trying to personally attack my ability to comprehend.
Vegepygmy 06-13-07, 08:13 PM	Hence when a warrior gets the skill, it shouldn't differ at all from when a mage gets it.This is where you err. Specialist mages study Spellcraft differently than non-specialist mages and warriors do. They concentrate their studies on their specialty school, and largely ignore their opposition schools. This is reflected in the +2 bonus they enjoy on Spellcraft checks related to their specialty school, and the -5 penalty they suffer on Spellcraft checks related to their opposition schools. I just don't see what's so difficult to understand about that.
cato 06-13-07, 08:34 PM	Ok seems like I will have to demonstrate a more specific example on where the system is flawed. Lets say you have a lvl 10 rogue with 13 ranks on spellcraft and you have been studying to become a mage but have not yet gotten any levels on that class. Lets say today you encounter a mage which casts hold monster on you 3-4 times and you immediately identify it with no penalties, then he goes away. At the end of the day you have enough xp to advance to the next lvl in which you choose to get your first lvl wizard class as an invoker specialist with enchantment as your opposing school. Next day the same wizard comes and he casts the same spell on you in exactly the same manner but you cant identify it cause you suddently have a negative score on your spellcraft check for that school. So unless you "house rule" that the rogue gets a penalty even while he is "studying" to become a specialist wizard (reminding here that there is no setup rule or specific guideline for characters who multiclass into a wizard), the system makes no sense. Is it more clear now?
Loki5654 06-14-07, 01:32 AM	Lets say you have a lvl 10 rogue with 13 ranks on spellcraft Actually, let's say 7 ranks. Spellcraft is a cross-class skill for rogues. Next day the same wizard comes and he casts the same spell on you in exactly the same manner but you cant identify it cause you suddently have a negative score on your spellcraft check for that school. I'm not granting you the premise that a negative modifier automatically equals failure, but I see where you are going with this. So unless you "house rule" that the rogue gets a penalty even while he is "studying" to become a specialist wizard (reminding here that there is no setup rule or specific guideline for characters who multiclass into a wizard), the system makes no sense. The system does make sense, you are just focusing too much on your interpretation of the fluff. As I've said before, the only 100% clear-cut answer is "The Rules say so". As for an "in-game" explanation of the negative modifier, that depends entirely on the game. One DM could say "I don't agree with that, let's change it." another could say "Well, obviously your newfound focus on Evocation has made it harder to discern Enchantments. Still, you get an extra spell per day so that's just part of the trade off." and a third could say "When you chose to specialize, microscopic albino cats from the Moon of Hackensack infiltrated the temporal lobe of your brain and partially eradicated your knowledge of Enchantments." And each DM would be 100% correct for their game. You are obviously looking for some "in-game" explanation of what is in fact an out-of-game mechanic. I can't help you with your concept of the game-world. That's something for you and your DM to share together. The only answer that I can give you that is even remotely correct is "Because the Rules say so." I've said my piece. I'm done here.
Vegepygmy 06-14-07, 01:36 AM	Ok seems like I will have to demonstrate a more specific example on where the system is flawed.You've presented a highly contrived example and proven that the game system can be quirky. You haven't proven that it "makes no sense," however. And note that you can have the same result with a rogue who doesn't multiclass as an evoker. One day he rolls well on his Spellcraft checks and identifies the spell the enemy wizard casts as hold monster and the next day he rolls poorly and fails to identify the same spell cast in exactly the same manner. So what?
risner 06-14-07, 04:02 AM	Ok seems like I will have to demonstrate a more specific example on where the system is flawed. Is it more clear now? It is clear you want to continue to push an in-game fix for an out-of-game limitation. It isn't fair to the other players in your game to work this hard to limit a restriction designed into the system.
Prince_of_Parkness 06-14-07, 06:17 AM	I think you guys got it all wrong... A) When you've been gifted with magic, you don't simply study it. It infuses itself to you, it's a part of your soul. When you're a specialist, you don't just choose to study a particualr scool, you have a natural inclination to it. When you try to study an oppositional school, you're trying to infuse yourself with knowledge that is diametrically opposed to your existence. It's simply harder to grasp, as the symbols, glyphs and gesticulations are counter-intuitive and alien. im not argueing that a specialst should be able to cast spells of an oppsoite school, and surely your not arguing that the mere studying of magic infuses something into your body. If a mage's prohibited school is the necromancery class, then surely they could find time to study eye witness accounts of powerful necromancers useing magic just in case they meet one sometime. And when they do and the necromancer stars casting a spell, I think the specialist could make a spellcraft check without a penalty to identify it as he has studied it. He should take a penalty to try and dispell it once he's identified it, but not simply to identify it.
Prince_of_Parkness 06-14-07, 06:30 AM	This is where you err. Specialist mages study Spellcraft differently than non-specialist mages and warriors do. They concentrate their studies on their specialty school, and largely ignore their opposition schools. This is reflected in the +2 bonus they enjoy on Spellcraft checks related to their specialty school, and the -5 penalty they suffer on Spellcraft checks related to their opposition schools. I just don't see what's so difficult to understand about that. Wouldn't a specialst gain a benefit to identify spells from their special school because they cast them often? i.e. A Specialst necromancer sees a demon cast create undead. "Im pretty sure I kno that spell and i think ive used it before." To be sure, he does a check but recieves a bonus cuz hes used similar spells before, were as an ordinary mage would say, "I may have read about that spell some where, I wonder what it is exactly." To find out, he makes a spellcheck with out any modifications. Now following this logic it is easily explained why there is a penalty for forbiiden spells, but I think it can be countered by studying this forbidden school with should be part of any mage's background story.
Captain_Kobold 06-14-07, 07:25 AM	Cato is correct in that the specific situation that he posits shows the rules are a little wonky in that regard. However, there are many rules that also do not make sense in much less contrived situations. These are sacrifices and abstractions that the game makes for balance or ease of use. I would say it makes at least as much sense as the way the example level 10 rogue, even without any ranks in spellcraft, could learn to be a wizard after a few days of running around stabbing things without requiring the umpteen years of study that a wizard would normally need. Spellcraft is a study of the underlying principles of magic, arcane or divine. There are more similarities between an arcane and divine spell of the same school that two arcane spells of different schools. If the situation offends you on such a deep and personal level, I would suggest a houserule that instead of taking a straight -5 to spellcraft checks for their opposed school, ranks in spellcraft bought with skill points from specialist wizard levels count as 5 less (min 0) when applied to checks relating to opposed schools. For those that appear to be asking "Why can't a specialist wizard make a special effort to study her opposed schools to overcome the limitation of knowing less about their basic principles?" The only thing I can say is that if a wizard makes an effort to study all the schools evenly, they are not a specialist wizard. Or to look at it another way, ask them the question: What benefit of being a specialist wizard should a character forego in order to balance out not getting the substantial penalty to spellcraft for two entire schools of magic? If your character really wants to make a special effort, and the DM okays it, taking a feat to remove the spellcraft penalty on one of your opposed schools seems about right for the amout of special effort required.
Banatine 06-14-07, 08:00 AM	Wouldn't a specialst gain a benefit to identify spells from their special school because they cast them often? i.e. A Specialst necromancer sees a demon cast create undead. "Im pretty sure I kno that spell and i think ive used it before." To be sure, he does a check but recieves a bonus cuz hes used similar spells before, were as an ordinary mage would say, "I may have read about that spell some where, I wonder what it is exactly." To find out, he makes a spellcheck with out any modifications. Now following this logic it is easily explained why there is a penalty for forbiiden spells, but I think it can be countered by studying this forbidden school with should be part of any mage's background story. Hang on. He wouldn't have studied spells from his forbidden school, because it is forbidden. He wouldn't learn it because he is studying in other fields. I have been studying psychology for the last 2 years. We have to memorize every psychological study within 7 seperate fields of education. Its difficult enough to remember all the studies in one field, let alone 7, because the subject is very complicated. So I decided to focus on 1 of the fields (because it was the one that interested me most). However, because I spent the majority of my time on that area, I had to choose a couple that I wouldn't study (so I pick the 2 I dislike the most.) Now, replace the word 'psychology' with 'magic', and the word 'field' with 'school', and you will understand the rules of spellcraft. Well, at least that is the most sensible way to look at it.
Knightblde 06-14-07, 10:14 AM	Ok seems like I will have to demonstrate a more specific example on where the system is flawed. Lets say you have a lvl 10 rogue with 13 ranks on spellcraft and you have been studying to become a mage but have not yet gotten any levels on that class. Lets say today you encounter a mage which casts hold monster on you 3-4 times and you immediately identify it with no penalties, then he goes away. At the end of the day you have enough xp to advance to the next lvl in which you choose to get your first lvl wizard class as an invoker specialist with enchantment as your opposing school. Next day the same wizard comes and he casts the same spell on you in exactly the same manner but you cant identify it cause you suddently have a negative score on your spellcraft check for that school. So unless you "house rule" that the rogue gets a penalty even while he is "studying" to become a specialist wizard (reminding here that there is no setup rule or specific guideline for characters who multiclass into a wizard), the system makes no sense. Is it more clear now? Yes, it is more clear. You want to, as another poster stated, turn in game thought patterns to out of game rules. Thry changing your thought pattern to the one listed below. Remember your example works on in game, not out of game, so I will do the same. Your rogue is getting pretty well versed at spellcraft. He decides that he has found his new calling and wants to become a wizard. He is really good at disecerning spells when people cast them. He has also decided that he likes the school of invocation but wants nothing to do with necromancy or conjuration. He is going to be an Ivnoker! Just after a long adventure our rogue rests up, finds a teacher and becomes an Invoker. It is a happy glorious day and he is estatic! A few days later he is in his first ever spell duel. He is ready. His 'wizard finger' is twitching with excitement. His foe begins casting. The foe takes his right hand, touches his thumb to his pinky and thrusts his hand out like a spear. "Hah" our rogue says, "he can't pull that on me. Doesn't he know I am an Invoker!" The rogue dispells the magic missle without a thought. Now the foe starts casting another spell. Our confident rogue is ready. He is sure that this unworthy advesary is about to cast another invocation spell cause hey, that's what works best! Wait, he thinks, that's not an invocation spell, that's not how you hold your hand when casti... ut oh, it is one of those, those conjuration spells! I knew I should have listened when master told me to watch pay attention to those more. But he just showed me a fireball! What did my master say, oh, yes, 'when righties go left, above their head, a creature is bound to make you de..' Our rogue was just knocked unconsious by a bearded devil because he was sure his foe would try the same tactics as the rogue. He was cocky and over-confident of his new found training. This is common for people learning things. This is an in game way to understand why you are now worse off at spotting conjuration spells. It is called tunnel vision. Now you have a 100% valid in game reason (with an example at no charge) as to how and why spellcraft works the way it does. As for 'learning your opposing school' as far a spellcraft is concerned, just take skill focus. Now you will be better than other specialists of your kind in your opposing schools, as well as your chosen one. Happy Gaming!
cato 06-14-07, 11:37 AM	Actually, let's say 7 ranks. Spellcraft is a cross-class skill for rogues. This argument makes no sense as you could have the same example with a bard, druid or priest sorcerer etc.. And note that you can have the same result with a rogue who doesn't multiclass as an evoker. No its not the same since a penalty like that might actually lead you to -not having a chance- of identifying a spell you identified the previous day 5 times I have been studying psychology for the last 2 years. We have to memorize every psychological study within 7 seperate fields of education. Its difficult enough to remember all the studies in one field, let alone 7, because the subject is very complicated. So I decided to focus on 1 of the fields (because it was the one that interested me most). However, because I spent the majority of my time on that area, I had to choose a couple that I wouldn't study (so I pick the 2 I dislike the most.) Now, replace the word 'psychology' with 'magic', and the word 'field' with 'school', and you will understand the rules of spellcraft. Well, at least that is the most sensible way to look at it. I have been studying medicine for the past 5 years, and I find it hard to believe that I would in a theoretical game mechanic get a -5 vs an engineer who studied -medicine craft- on a subject like anatomy although I will specialize in a field of internal medicine. But I dont think situations like this fit the fantasy/specialist mage agenda. Bottom line here: For those who claim that I am nitpicking the rules and not focusing on the game experience. This thread is simply meant to point out one of the many faults/quirks and mis tuned portions of the rules. The whole premise of me starting this thread is that I always wondered about the logic of this rule cause I found it illogical in its mechanic not the thing it is trying to emulate. I am not arguing about weather a specialist might know less about identifying an opposing school than someone who studies this general field. (Although as a specialist I would at least try to keep my identification skills of opposing schools at least as high), its about the inefficiency /logical asymmetry of the mechanic used to do this. For example in our campaigns since second edition (not that this reflects my personal preference) we usually use this pattern: 1) No character can decide to multiclass in a wizard unless he has had spent at least 10 years under some sort of school, academy, wizard - simply studying a bit every day between adventures with the party wizard wont do.. 2) A wizard can only identify arcane spells/spell like abilities, while a priest can only identify divine spells, assuming they are on his spell list. 3) A wizard cant even attempt to identify spells of his opposing school (As it is obvious up to now I kinda disagree with this one, but our DM is kinda old school)
Prince_of_Parkness 06-14-07, 12:51 PM	Hang on. He wouldn't have studied spells from his forbidden school, because it is forbidden. He wouldn't learn it because he is studying in other fields. I have been studying psychology for the last 2 years. We have to memorize every psychological study within 7 seperate fields of education. Its difficult enough to remember all the studies in one field, let alone 7, because the subject is very complicated. So I decided to focus on 1 of the fields (because it was the one that interested me most). However, because I spent the majority of my time on that area, I had to choose a couple that I wouldn't study (so I pick the 2 I dislike the most.) Now, replace the word 'psychology' with 'magic', and the word 'field' with 'school', and you will understand the rules of spellcraft. Well, at least that is the most sensible way to look at it. Firstly, can someone please explain without using the word forbidden why i specialist cant study eyewitness accounts of oposite school magic being cast to neglect the identification penalty. (I know he wouldn't learn any spells from the oposite school) Secondly i dont find it appropriat to compare thinking outsdie the box to raising dead and blasting people with fire balls.
Knightblde 06-14-07, 01:07 PM	Firstly, can someone please explain without using the word forbidden why i specialist cant study eyewitness accounts of oposite school magic being cast to neglect the identification penalty. (I know he wouldn't learn any spells from the oposite school) You can, it is called Skill Focus Spellcraft. It will allow you to get back 3 of the 5 points that you lose. Of course the DC does not change, and you still have a -5, but your general skill goes up +5 You could also give up your specialized school and also lose your opposed schools. As for why you CAN'T do it, it is the same as a fighter not being able to use a two-bladed sword without a -4 penalty without a new feat. It does not mater how much he uses a quarterstaff, or how much he watches someone use it, he just can't do it without the feat, ever, period.
Vegepygmy 06-14-07, 01:27 PM	The whole premise of me starting this thread is that I always wondered about the logic of this rule cause I found it illogical in its mechanic...Well, the logic of it has been explained to you. Most people seem to think that the logic makes sense. You disagree. I guess we're done. :tiphat:
Vegepygmy 06-14-07, 01:31 PM	Firstly, can someone please explain without using the word forbidden why i specialist cant study eyewitness accounts of oposite school magic being cast to neglect the identification penalty.I think Risner explained it best a day ago: There isn't anyone there to slap someone for breaking an "unwritten law", it is that the characters (specialist wizards) don't venture outside their schools to the prohibited schools because they choose to limit themselves. You are not playing a specialist wizard if you play him as someone that "wants" to break some unwritten law or as someone who might dabble in the prohibited schools.
cato 06-14-07, 03:11 PM	Well, the logic of it has been explained to you. Most people seem to think that the logic makes sense. You disagree. I guess we're done. :tiphat: What 2 people posting here think makes little matter since everyone i have asked irl agrees. Unless you base all your arguments in gallops/popularity contests instead of clear logic. What does matter is that I have stated a logical example of why this rule is broken, I was hoping I wouldn't have to but I guess an explanation on clear logic wasn't enough. I have yet to see a response/explanation to this argument on how this skill is not buggy/broken. Having resorted to the: "2 more agree with me than with you" argument, just further proves the validity of my point. Have fun :detect:
Prince_of_Parkness 06-14-07, 03:14 PM	Never mind. I doubt you'll ever convince me otherwise, and i sure wont convince you. I'll just make a house rule for my games and leave you alone.
Mastel 06-14-07, 04:14 PM	Majority don't make you right! Logic is something you got after a deduction with good premises. Too often we see logic coming from how we see things & how we would like to see it. It’s not because someone don’t think the same as you that they fail to understand what you say. They is always a way to accept the rules (in D&D) as they are many ways to critic they logic. No matters what house rules you will came up with, there will always be someone to tell you it’s not “logic”. I m in favor to follow the rules as they are. Wizards have problems with opposing school & no difficulty with priest spell. So be it & nothing else. Sorry for my English
Vegepygmy 06-14-07, 04:55 PM	What 2 people posting here think makes little matter since everyone i have asked irl agrees.I have a sneaking suspicion that people who know you IRL "agree" with you whether they really do or not, just to avoid being hounded to death by your counter-arguments. But as long as you're happy with the result, I'm happy. Play on!
cato 06-14-07, 05:56 PM	I see you continue with your impregnable and logical argument of the popularity logic, so i guess there is nothing more to say. As for your assumptions for my irl life, they are noted, and as well founded as the rest of your arguments. But I guess your happy in your middle age way of thinking so who am I to disturb it.
Vegepygmy 06-14-07, 07:01 PM	I agree with every single thing you just said. :D
cato 06-14-07, 07:09 PM	Good for you :) Next time you encounter logic gather the rest of the village and form a mob! Even more effective! Remember the more you are the better your argument is ;)
arjomanes 06-14-07, 07:51 PM	Spellcraft is penalized by specialization, even though you invested as much effort into spellcraft. You are as skilled at spellcraft (as measured in ranks) as a generalized wizard, but by taking specialization you take a bonus to your specialized school and a penalty to your forbidden schools. You can determine the logic of it like this: A wizard has a certain number of resources for learning magic. This could be hours in a day, mental stamina, capacity for learning, etc. A general wizard uses up all these resources learning about all schools. A specialist wizard, when he specializes, cannot specialize and still learn all schools. He doesn't have enough resources. So he has to sacrifice. And specializing requires that he give up two schools. In order to specialize he must spend all the resources for two schools of magic on his specialized school. In direct relation to this, spellcraft for a specialized wizard reflects this focus. Being a specialist wizard requires that he specializes in spellcraft. As a result he get a +2 bonus to recognize spells from his school. But in order to get that +2 bonus, he must take a -5 penalty on spells in his forbidden schools. He uses up all his spellcraft resources to specialize in spellcraft, and cannot also use them on his forbidden schools. Unfortunately, for our poor specialist wizard, he cannot choose to specialize in his wizard class levels without specializing in spellcraft too. But them's the breaks. You gotta specialize all the way or not. It's a cruel world and specialist wizards just don't get any love apparently. It's logical. A druid knows more about wizard necromancy spells than a wizard who bans that school. The wizard doesn't have enough time in the day to learn about necromancy because all his time is spent specializing in evocation. The druid has plenty of time to learn about necromancy, including how wizard necromancy spells are cast, since he didn't already spend that time specializing. It's not that there's a big NO god with a red stamp forbidding you to learn spells from your forbidden schools, it's that you just don't have the time or energy or capability to both specialize and still know spells from all the schools. Something's gotta give. And that something is your forbidden schools. As a specialist wizard, whenever you gain class levels and whenever you put ranks into spellcraft, you specialize. You gain the bonuses and you take the penalties. You cannot get the bonus without taking the penalty. The rogue in your example doesn't get that bonus, so he doesn't have to take the penalty. By choosing to specialize you say, 'ok, I'll take those penalties since I can really use those bonuses.' If you can't take the heat, don't specialize. It's perfectly logical. You might not like it, but that doesn't mean it's illogical.
cato 06-14-07, 07:58 PM	The rogue in your example doesn't get that bonus, so he doesn't have to take the penalty. Why doesn't he get the bonus? According to the rules there is nothing from preventing you to start your 1st wizard lvl as a specialist.
navar100 06-14-07, 08:15 PM	I'm a 5th level wizard. BBEG is 7th level. He casts Confusion. It's logical I can identify a spell not only can't I cast but never saw before? What about if it's Burning Blood? I know RAW says I can, but there is a logical gap being able to identify spells you never saw before. However, you could say the check is determining if you know of it. Fail the check, you never read of it. (If it's a spell you actually know, you just didn't see/recognize the spell completion process in time.) Still, if your teacher didn't know Burning Blood, your school didn't know of Burning Blood, your country didn't know of Burning Blood, but some foreign power sends its agents to cause trouble for a planned invasion and one said agent casts Burning Blood, you're able to identify it?
arjomanes 06-14-07, 08:15 PM	Why doesn't he get the bonus? According to the rules there is nothing from preventing you to start your 1st wizard lvl as a specialist. In your example, your rogue who hadn't taken any levels of wizard wasn't a specialist. He didn't get a bonus and he didn't get a penalty. After he specializes, he gets the bonus and has to take the penalty. That's because he is a specialist wizard, not a rogue. It is a little sticky in that example, and I'll admit the mechanic is a little stretched there. You can consider that learning new things makes things learned earlier more difficult to recall. Of course that isn't the most polished explanation, but then I know so little about spell casting in the real world anyways that it's difficult for me to figure out all the logic of it. Sometimes game mechanics can't perfectly align with non-magical reality, and I'm willing to accept that it's possible to create a scenario where a given rule doesn't mesh perfectly with my modern interpretation of common sense. Personally I don't think it's that big a stretch, and I think the mechanic as a whole works fine and nicely supports the whole specialization flavor. If you want to house-rule that specialization has no impact on spellcraft, you can, but I like the way they're tied together and I think the mechanic works fine.
arjomanes 06-14-07, 08:28 PM	I'm a 5th level wizard. BBEG is 7th level. He casts Confusion. It's logical I can identify a spell not only can't I cast but never saw before? What about if it's Burning Blood? Still, if your teacher didn't know Burning Blood, your school didn't know of Burning Blood, your country didn't know of Burning Blood, but some foreign power sends its agents to cause trouble for a planned invasion and one said agent casts Burning Blood, you're able to identify it? But you know necromancy spells. You know how necromancy spells are cast. Who says you don't know 'of' burning blood? You can't cast it sure, but why do you say you never heard of it before? The opposite is true in fact. The game mechanics define the game. Sure it's a roleplaying game, but you have to play within the rules. You can't say "I DO recognize that as burning blood! I have it on my spell list! Even though I failed my spellcraft check." Therefore, you can't say, "I DON'T recognize that as burning blood. How could I possibly know that? I know I succeeded on my spellcraft check, but I can't fathom a world where my character could ever possibly ever have heard of that spell." The rules say if you pass on a spellcraft check then you recognize it, so it's up to the player and DM to decide how you know that spell. Maybe you saw it mentioned when you were reading in the library "And lo Gothric the impaler didst corrode the very bloode of the beast itself with the element of fire and with acid as from the tanner vat. And it didst cry with anguish and gnashing and wailing and falling upon the ground it convulsest wherefore it didst not again arise." There could be lots of very plausible reasons you would know of a spell you've never cast or seen cast. "Yo dude check out this scar. Burning blood. That's what the cleric said. It sucks. I had this wizard down on the ground with my spiked chain and he wiggled his fingers like this and pulled out this little heart, like a chicken or something. And he hit me with this spell. It felt like I had fire or acid or something running through my blood. Totally bogus."
cato 06-14-07, 08:33 PM	It is a little sticky in that example, and I'll admit the mechanic is a little stretched there. That was the main think i was pointing out here, as to the magnitude of the "stickiness" that is of course for an individual DM to determine. Personally I don't think it's that big a stretch, and I think the mechanic as a whole works fine and nicely supports the whole specialization flavor. Thats exactly the frame of thought under which this rule was made, to support the "flavor". And not the realism of a wizard knowing less about invocation than your average ranger. Or someone forgetting 4 lvls worth of spellcraft he already used the last day cause of a rules glitch. If you want to house-rule that specialization has no impact on spellcraft, you can, but I like the way they're tied together and I think the mechanic works fine. Well as has been said before anyone can play the game according to his likes and dislikes, and in this case it is in fact in accordance to the raw. So if you like it there is no reason to change it. The mechanic might not be "fine" imo as you say but that depends on how much leeway you leave on the practical approach of this or other rules, and how such discrepancies affect your game. Personally I like to patch little discrepancies like that whenever I can, unless of course it affects game balance in a significant way or it affects/breaks game mechanics negatively, something I dont believe to be the case here.
Trundle 06-14-07, 08:34 PM	For those of you discussing "logic," please keep in mind that you are discussing a game mechanic. While we all hope that there is an internal logic that binds these mechanics together, discussion about what a wizard might or could do in a fantasy world are irrelevant. They get a -5 to certain Spellcraft rolls because they get extra slots per day; it's a question of game balance. They can make up for this deficit a number of ways withing the rules (increasing their Int, various feats, etc.), but they will be sacrificing other possibilities. Your examples all break down if you extend the analogy to other classes: What prevents a rogue from spending all day hanging around the wizarding academy and learning to identify spells by sight and sound just as well as a wizard? Well, probably nothing in the world itself, but the game mechanics dictate that he'll probably be much worse at it (since it's a cross-class skill) than a comparable wizard. The fact is that in D20 you don't get better at things by doing them. It doesn't matter how much time you spend in game trying to identify spells, you never get any better at it until you defeat x number of encounters. Hang out watching spells get cast all day if you like, you'll be the same as when you started in a D20 world. Meanwhile, the guy who went out to kill some non-casting goblins suddenly understands more about the way magic functions. But nothing in the rules prevents your evoker from "spending his time" (if you prefer to think of it that way) learning to identify abjuration spells just as well as a rogue. He can take the Skill Focus (Spellcraft) and Magical Aptitude feats, and he'll probably be much better at spotting abjuration spells than a rogue (since he's still got the class skill advantage). It's just that between that and the "time" he dedicated to being such a great evoker, he hasn't had as much "time" to, say, learn to make potions or empower his spells.
arjomanes 06-14-07, 08:44 PM	Thats exactly the frame of thought under which this rule was made, to support the "flavor". And not the realism of a wizard knowing less about invocation than your average ranger. Or someone forgetting 4 lvls worth of spellcraft he already used the last day cause of a rules glitch. Ideally, the game will always be logical, but for just about every rule you can come up with some scenario if you think long enough that seems a little glitchy. Again a wizard should always be able to beat a ranger at spellcraft, even on forbidden schools since spellcraft is a class skill. So really we should compare clerics or druids with specialist wizards. Rangers and rogues will usually not be better at spellcraft than specialist wizards, except in very rare situations, such as low levels or when rangers or rogues who put cross-class ranks in rolled really well. I think the mechanic is good most of the time, and though you can come up with a scenario that makes it seem a little odd, that's going to be pretty rare. I mean who will really be playing a level 11 rogue/level 1 specialist wizard who put 6 cross-class ranks in spellcraft (12 skill points) and 1 class rank in? Really the -5 penalty to spellcraft wouldn't be the main worry in that case. So I think it's possible to come up with situations where all game mechanics can seem a little implausible, and if you like you can houserule to try to iron it out as best as you can, or you can come up with some reason that you think works ok, or you can jsut say well it defies logic, but there you have it. I think the rule is pretty logical, and I explained some ways that I think it's logical. But of course you can think it's crazy.
cato 06-14-07, 09:22 PM	I think the rule is pretty logical, and I explained some ways that I think it's logical. But of course you can think it's crazy. By no means did I express the feeling that its crazy, I guess when it comes down to it, I merely pointed out a glitch (who knows it might even help a dev while ironing out the rules, or not), and stated that for me, the logic/mechanic behind this rule is below par for the standards I would like my campaign to have - considering how easily it could be fixed. There are many issues touching this subject concerning the nature of learning magic and/or to be a wizard. But this starts to extend a bit beyond this thread: Like for example wizards in their description are highly intelligent individuals studying exclusively for a significant period of their life to master the arcane arts. But in the same set of rules you have a fighter -possibly of lower intellect - who has no official limitation to becoming a wizard, rather than a sane GM, who will enforce these limitations (whatever those may be). A more funny example of this is that theoretically one can study spellcraft as a cross class skill that lets you decipher arcane writing while being illiterate (i.e barbarian) - and although could be far fetched explanation of how this happened its close to impossible. Another example is that you have a class like the bard or the cleric who are specified to acquire spells in the form of prayer or song and definitely use different sorts of somatic components as stated in the phb. (different gestures, allow them to use armor with no penalty). The above classes have no problem identifying wizard spells or the opposite cause people assume that spellcraft is a skill - separate from their class that allows you to identify all sorts of magic. But if it is that- just a separate skill, why should it be affected by class features? So the linking of a specialization school with a separate multiclass skill is an attempt to add flavor/realism and some sort of balance (although the balance effect is negligible) and its really a small chip in the rules that can be followed to a deeper crack in part of the logic of magic, its development and workings, which at least needs some clarification if not some tuning.
risner 06-14-07, 09:30 PM	Good for you :) Next time you encounter logic gather the rest of the village and form a mob! Even more effective! Remember the more you are the better your argument is ;) Hate to say, but you haven't had any logic behind your position in this thread? Or did I miss a post? Since there is no logic in getting your cake and eating it too. It is a for game balance. It makes sense and is logical as written.
cato 06-14-07, 09:45 PM	Hate to say, but you haven't had any logic behind your position in this thread? Or did I miss a post? Since there is no logic in getting your cake and eating it too. It is a for game balance. It makes sense and is logical as written. You probably missed a lot of posts... try the above one and check out the multiclassing example.. if thats not enough for you I can extend to simpler and more blatant ones like the sorcerer who multiclasses into a specialist mage and suddenly doesnt have the required spellcraft to identify his own spells..
Knightblde 06-14-07, 10:11 PM	[QUOTE=cato;12731189]By no means did I express the feeling that its crazy, I think that you have, by many means, expressed that you have a problem with this rule, aka: think it is crazy But if it is that- just a separate skill, why should it be affected by class features? Buy this 'logic' why bother with class skills and cross class skills? Also, why not let everyone have access to every feat? What about skill tricks? It is really simple, and I still don't understand your issue, especially with the above quote. So tell me this, do you have a problem with a specialist wizard getting a -5 to spellcraft checks in opposing schools? Remember the mechanical reason is that that same wizards gets a +2 for spellcraft checks of his favored school, as well. This would also mean that the wizard is better at counterspelling and learning spells from his favored school. This would also mean that the same wizard would be bad at counterspelling schools HE HAS CHOSEN TO IGNORE, aka choosing them as opposing schools. In 2nd edition, you didn't get the choice, here you do. Do you ever watch the TV show Bones? She is a anthropogist, I guess one of the best in the fake world they depict. She cannont stand psycology. While a scientist that studys how groups of people behave and interact, she knows, to a comical extent, absolutely nothing about how a single person acts. It works like that. and the main point is, it WORKS. So, again, where do you stand on the issue? I am confused.
cato 06-14-07, 10:21 PM	[QUOTE] I think that you have, by many means, expressed that you have a problem with this rule, aka: think it is crazy Having a problem with something doesn't mean you think its crazy, I think its a sloppy solution to the spellcraft rule but I understand the logic behind it. So tell me this, do you have a problem with a specialist wizard getting a -5 to spellcraft checks in opposing schools? Remember the mechanical reason is that that same wizards gets a +2 for spellcraft checks of his favored school, as well. This would also mean that the wizard is better at counterspelling and learning spells from his favored school. This would also mean that the same wizard would be bad at counterspelling schools HE HAS CHOSEN TO IGNORE, aka choosing them as opposing schools. In 2nd edition, you didn't get the choice, here you do. As stated I understand the logic behind it but I think the whole system is fundamentally flawed, and while in most cases you can ignore the flaw that doesnt mean its right. It solves some balance issues pertaining to the abilities and flavor of a specialist wizard but the mechanic is flawed. i.e why should you be bad at counterspelling a spell you had no problem counterspelling yesterday as a 10th lvl sorcerer, when getting your first specialist mage lvl today. You are suddenly not able to counterspell a spell you already counterspelled, its a breach in common logic.. My proposition to the solution is that spellcraft should be tied to the specific class you take - as someone suggested in another thread- that would solve a lot of problems in continuity /logic. Its not all about practical balance, especially when it does not even apply in cases as above.
Banatine 06-15-07, 04:03 AM	If you don't like the way the system works how about this: "you gain a cumulative +1 circumstance bonus on spellcraft checks to identify any spell that you have succesfully identified before" There. Simple, effective, fixes your 'glitch'. Am i right? It certainly fixes your rogue example, or are there still other scenarios that suffer from this problem?
risner 06-15-07, 07:47 AM	You probably missed a lot of posts... try the above one and check out the multiclassing example.. if thats not enough for you I can extend to simpler and more blatant ones like the sorcerer who multiclasses into a specialist mage and suddenly doesnt have the required spellcraft to identify his own spells.. I assure you, I have not missed a single post. I disagree with your asserted logical leaps. "you gain a cumulative +1 circumstance bonus on spellcraft checks to identify any spell that you have succesfully identified before" Oh gawd, its coming right for me ... Bad idea.
Lucas Blackstone 06-15-07, 07:59 AM	Essentially the specialist wizard focuses so much on his specialized school that regardless of his prior knowledge, he becomes "rusty" on the now ignored school(s). Cramming and cramming and cramming with his specialized school so much that he even gains extra spell slots requires him to give up the ability to understand spells he may have understood before. They become unfamiliar to him. There's tons of ways to describe it so it makes sense or doesn't make sense depending on which side of the argument you are on.
cato 06-15-07, 01:05 PM	I assure you, I have not missed a single post. I disagree with your asserted logical leaps. Well Since your not stating what point you think is not valid exactly or you are not presenting any counterargument other than generalized/unfounded debunking of my post, then I see a current futility in continuing to converse. I think enough has been said in this post to present both sides of the case, and maybe it will serve as a source of examples and information for future people wondering about the same subject.