| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 03 Apr 2003 : 07:49:28
My first question here is this: Why is there this huge limitation on gaining arcane spells? With divine spells, the caster knows them all once (s)he reaches that level. But a wizard can only gain two. There might be an Intelligence modifier for that (that's the second question) but that's still far below what divine spellcasters gain. Why is that?
Second question: How exactly does the bonus spell listing work? Is it an extra to cast, or an extra to learn? Since the table in the PBH is for all spellcasting, I assume the first, but then why don't spellcasters gain bonus 0-level spells?
Third: Just a question about a single spell. Can a sorcerer or wizard use Tenser's Floating Disk to carry him/herself? |
| 28 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| eilinel |
Posted - 15 Apr 2003 : 12:15:58
totally true, i didnt remember the fact that u had to pay twice when u were not allowed to get this skill.
(Tumble was the best skill of the 2nd edition, nobody can say the contrary)
|
| zemd |
Posted - 15 Apr 2003 : 10:36:37
quote:
Originally posted by eilinel
tumble only for the thieves and bards...
They weren't restricted, you had to pay twice price to buy them (like cross class skills)
quote:
Originally posted by eilinel
u couldnt really get a better level -u could but it was almost useless
For example you buy knowledge plane for n point. So when you'll have to mak a check on that skill, you'll have to make a check under your intelligence - n
So when you have a good intellingence, it's useless to spend more. While in 3E, you roll to beat a DC. D20+intellinge modifier+Skill points |
| eilinel |
Posted - 15 Apr 2003 : 08:25:37
it was thief in the first and second edition but its exactly the same thing with the same skills and everything.
The fact is that in the second edition, nobody could pickpocket anyone except the thief and the bard, nobody could move silently but the thief and the ranger...
in the second edition existed generél skills and specific skills like tumble only for the thieves and bards... but u had very few points and every skill needed one point to be learnt. Then the DM invented a level of check and u tried ur action. But eventually, u couldnt really get a better level -u could but it was almost useless-
Am i clear? when i read it, it doenst seem... |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 15 Apr 2003 : 02:29:32
Wait, when exactly did rogues come into it? I thought that they were another 3e invention, replacing the thief.
-_-' I think I need to do some research. |
| zemd |
Posted - 14 Apr 2003 : 22:04:04
quote:
Originally posted by Bookwyrm
Skill points aren't new?
Well technically speaking they are. It was called Non weapon ... (points/skills/... i don't remember, it was so long ago).
And the rogue skills weren't possible to buy with them (it was % that you distributed every levels, but only for rogues, bard, and maybe rangers as well) |
| eilinel |
Posted - 14 Apr 2003 : 19:55:30
its true that they have less skills basicaly, but since their main ability is intelligence, they eventually find them with more skills than all others classes -exept the rogue-
isn't it true, Zemd?
im sure u agree
my character has probably as much skill points as all the other five players...  , well, im a rogue/mage  |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 14 Apr 2003 : 19:04:04
Skill points aren't new? I thought they were just in the third edition . . . (remember, I'm new to the gaming).
And the most that a wizard (I, at least, prefered the term "mage"  ) can cast at first level is 7 spells, even with bonuses. Four cantrips and three first-level spells. And that's with a bonus, again -- otherwise it's only four and two. A two-spell bonus for level-one spells doesn't come into play unless the wizard has at least 20 intelligence points.
Which brings up one of my original questions -- why doesn't a bonus come into play with the cantrips? And don't tell me that it's impossible to use that much cantip energy in one day; a sorcerer can. I think an increase in cantrips is a good idea. |
| zemd |
Posted - 14 Apr 2003 : 18:47:35
But in 2nd Edition the wizard had an other role than casting spells (i agree that it's their main role!). They had A LOT OF skill points! Whereas in 3rd edition they have less, than others (and i agree that they don't have a lot of choices) |
| Elrond Half Elven |
Posted - 14 Apr 2003 : 18:13:21
I agree Artalis, In 2nd edition the mage cast his spell and then stayed at the back for the rest of the adventure- not very fun. However in 3E it sounds like it will be alot funner playing a Wizard. PLUS they are called wizards now and not mages! lol .
I feel that mages are greatly improved, and the new cantraps being lv 0 spells is a much better idea- no long do you have to take cantrap as a level 1 spell. In my Humble honest opinion  Cantraps where usless in 2nd Edition! lol
Hanx
Elrond |
| Artalis |
Posted - 14 Apr 2003 : 17:59:38
quote:
Originally posted by eilinel
mmmm
ok, spells per day...
But even, generally talking i think they are more powerful.
the few points that Elrond noticed are true but they are not the mainly power they have -3rd edtion only-
Anyway, i still think that wizards and sorcerers are funnier
Maybe your right but 3rd edition is definitely a step in the right direction. A first level Wizard or Sorcerer character is capable of casting up to something like 8 spells a day at first level. Granted a significant portion of them are 0 level (cantrips) but the cantrips are really useful. Detect Magic and Read Magic and even some offensive stuff too.
Now compare that to Second edition's 1 spell per day (two if you're a specialist)1st level characters. Now at least a mage is not like a one shot wonder. A first level mage is actually usefull in a party of 1st level characters. |
| eilinel |
Posted - 14 Apr 2003 : 16:22:20
mmmm
ok, spells per day...
But even, generally talking i think they are more powerful.
the few points that Elrond noticed are true but they are not the mainly power they have -3rd edtion only-
Anyway, i still think that wizards and sorcerers are funnier |
| Elrond Half Elven |
Posted - 14 Apr 2003 : 15:55:01
Eilinel I would agree that in 3rd Edition Clerics are very powerful, Im sorry if what i say makes no sense i havent played 3e yet- i get my first game of it on Thursday Hopefully, However i feel that their powers have been 'toned' down slightly since 2nd Edition:
Turn Undead
I feel that this is not as powerful as it was in 2nd Edition. First of all you can only use this a limited number of times a day I think this is a good rule however i have seen entire undead dungeons where Turn Undead was fully utilised.
I have always felt that the CLeric was a good 'all round' character. In 2nd edition IMHO they where the second best Class for getting stuck in. Arm one with a blessed as per spell Morning Star (2D4 Damage and +1 Attack bonus), 16+ Strength and this would mean that at first level the Cleric would be fighting with a a THAC0 of 19 and damage of 2D4+1- this is as good as many Fighters i have seen at first Level. But back on to 3E...
I supose that Clerics are still as good a fighter as they where in 2nd Edition. But their Spell casting is far superior 3 Osirons and 2 normal 1st lv spells.  Lol well i suppose that with a high wisdom in 2nd Edition you could get 3 1st lv spells.
The 6 spells in 3E themselve are of an ok standard, i sepecially like:
0-level Spells
*Cure Minor Wounds: Ok its only 1 point of damage, but that can be used to stabilise some one.
*Guidance: a bonus of +1 to one roll!! My god now this is useful, if there is an opponent that you really want to floor casty this.
*Resistance: +1 on Saving throws i really like this one! Keep it handy!
1st Level Spells
*Bless: Bless, after a quick check i can't find any reason why this cannot be used aswell as Guidance.
*Bless Water: I mean come on, most people ahve a wineskin of water, this could be used in conjunction with Bless and Guidance to get rid of an Undead 'Boss'.
*Summon Monster I.
Ok i am beginning to see what people are meaing about the power of Clerics . Clerics are a powerful class, i still feel that they are best used for their Combat ability affecting spell. Well especially in the early levels.
I feel that the Versatility of Sorcerers and Bards is very Useful. They get to choose which spells to use with out having to memorize them. (i hope i read that passage right).
Oh and BTW Zemd my copy of the DMG came through to day, all im needing is the MM then i have the Three 3E core rule books... I still dont know wither or not I will update to 3.5 straight away. I might leave it till christmas to Update then.
Hanx
Elrond |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 14 Apr 2003 : 15:29:08
Actually, I don't really have a problem with a wizard's martial limitations, though I do think that clerics are overly warlike in many ways.
One of the reasons I started this topic, though, was because of how (it seems to me, anyway) limited the wizard is in getting new spells. Only two free spells with each level increase? I think that there should be bonus spells for intelligence.
EDIT:
Just to make it clear, I'm talking not about spells-per-day, but spells to add to the spell book itself. |
| eilinel |
Posted - 14 Apr 2003 : 14:55:01
Anyway, i DO think that a mage should be more powerful than a cleric since clerics have a lot of others advantages (armors, weapons, hp, resistances, heal spells...)
Werefore, i also think that the third edition put too much power for clerics in general.
But everyone have her idea about it. (his too)
Don't care, its my point.
|
| zemd |
Posted - 13 Apr 2003 : 14:38:08
quote:
Originally posted by Bookwyrm
quote:
Originally posted by zemd
It can be useful since Tenser's floating disk is 5 feet above the ground ONLY. So if there is a gap,it disappear.
Okay, I finally got around to looking it up again. It actually says that it floats three feet above the ground. You probably mixed it up with the top speed of the disk. (Don't count that against you, Zemd -- I didn't even notice the maximum extent it could rise from the ground.  I guess the great Wizards from that Coast don't want people to use it in place of a flying spell.)
It was on the top of my head. (i didn't have my books at home last week) |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 13 Apr 2003 : 13:49:27
quote:
Originally posted by zemd
It can be useful since Tenser's floating disk is 5 feet above the ground ONLY. So if there is a gap,it disappear.
Okay, I finally got around to looking it up again. It actually says that it floats three feet above the ground. You probably mixed it up with the top speed of the disk. (Don't count that against you, Zemd -- I didn't even notice the maximum extent it could rise from the ground. I guess the great Wizards from that Coast don't want people to use it in place of a flying spell.)
Now, while I was paging through the spell list, I found something else. It's not an arcane spell, but I don't know of any other place to put this. Anyway, it's just a problem I have with the description for the spell wind walk. Allow me to quote:
A magical wind wafts a wind walker along at up to 600 feet per round (60 mph) or as slow as 5 fee per round (1/2 mph) . . . .
 Who exactly is in charge of the math over there?
Let's take a look, for those of us (myself included) who can't do this in their heads.
600 feet per round = 100 feet per second. (1 round = 6 seconds.) Multiply that times 60 and you have 6,000 feet in one minute. That's 720 more feet than there are in one mile (5280). Or 43,200 feet than there are in sixty of them.
Now, I realize that it's not that much compared to the whole distance traveled at sixty miles per hour (316,800 feet) but that's still a little more than 8 extra miles.
Now what about the slowest speed? There are 600 (10 x 60) rounds in one hour, right? Well, at five feet per round, that means a wind walker would travel 3,000 feet in that time. A half-mile is 2,640 feet, or 360 feet less than they want you to think.
 Someone's got the math wrong, and I'm pretty sure it's not me. |
| Mournblade |
Posted - 12 Apr 2003 : 18:55:24
To continue the story with Bishop Odo, when Duke William stepped off of the boat to step on the English shore, he tripped and fell flat on his face. Odo was about to consider this a bad omen until William the Conqueror, rose from his fall with mud from the beach in both hands, and said "LOOK. I HAVE SEIZED THE SOIL OF ENGLAND WITH BOTH HANDS!" Well we all know what happened later.
Especially the UK folks here.
|
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 12 Apr 2003 : 18:01:24
Really? I never knew of any men of the cloth fighting like a D&D cleric. This bears looking into . . . . |
| Mournblade |
Posted - 12 Apr 2003 : 17:18:25
Generally speaking, the arcane spells are more useful in battle than Divine spells. SO a wizard is most likely more powerful in spells than a priest at higher levels, but this is why the clerics retain some ability to fight.
There is a great painting I saw about the Norman Conquest of England, where they showed Duke William fighting on horseback alongside his Norman Bishop, Bishop Odo. Odo was on horseback with a full chainmail hauberk, and wielding a MACE. It was great! Like a real world Cleric fighting for his king.
|
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 12 Apr 2003 : 14:54:08
Five feet only? I didn't notice that in the discription . . . . |
| zemd |
Posted - 11 Apr 2003 : 21:08:23
It can be useful since Tenser's floating disk is 5 feet above the ground ONLY. So if there is a gap,it disappear. Not the "Confortable armchair of Eilinel" |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 11 Apr 2003 : 19:37:45
Hey, useless spells are interesting, if not . . . . um, useful.  |
| eilinel |
Posted - 11 Apr 2003 : 15:48:39
i've done a spell based on Tenser's Floating Disk ive called confortable armchair of Eilinel[/i]. Its also based on [i]levitation since the armchair can go up too even if its slower than the normal spell.
I made this spell just for fun cause its absoluly useless, but in your house. Eilinel is always tired, and when she is, she wheeps. And she wheeps blood.
|
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 03 Apr 2003 : 22:28:45
Okay, thanks. I think that answers my questions for now. 
Oh, and AulayanDuerf, it's a real word. |
| AulayanDuerf |
Posted - 03 Apr 2003 : 20:35:16
In truth, for Wizards, there is no limit. You only get two spells for free every level. But, in travels, a wizard can come upon spellbooks and scrolls and learn spells off them. And also they can research existing and new spells, to learn them.
It's basically in there as a 'flavour' thing. Wizards being the research type. Also, clerics get to know all of them because they're agents of their deity who grants them spells. Doesn't make as much sense for them to have to labouriously (I think I just made up a word) work at it. |
| zemd |
Posted - 03 Apr 2003 : 18:44:00
quote:
Originally posted by Bookwyrm
Why is there this huge limitation on gaining arcane spells? With divine spells, the caster knows them all once (s)he reaches that level. But a wizard can only gain two.
Wizard's are more powerful (IMO that's not so true in 3E). Furthermore, a cleric have is limited in number, not the wizard. (the sorceror is)
quote:
Originally posted by Bookwyrm
There might be an Intelligence modifier for that but that's still far below what divine spellcasters gain. Why is that? How exactly does the bonus spell listing work? Is it an extra to cast, or an extra to learn? Since the table in the PBH is for all spellcasting, I assume the first, but then why don't spellcasters gain bonus 0-level spells?
The intelligence modifier applies to the spell cast per day ONLY. For the sorceror it's for both (i'm not sure for that last one, it's what i think)
quote:
Originally posted by Bookwyrm
Third: Just a question about a single spell. Can a sorcerer or wizard use Tenser's Floating Disk to carry him/herself?
Yes |
| The Defence Minister |
Posted - 03 Apr 2003 : 17:20:08
I am 99% sure that 'One Extra Spell' means an extra spell to cast, ie memorize.
TDM |
| Drummer Boy |
Posted - 03 Apr 2003 : 15:14:31
1st Question: I don't know for sure (I've never played a divine spellcaster before) but I would guess that arcane spellcasters gain slower to balance out some abilities they have.
2nd Question: Bonus spells as I understand it are an extra spell to cast. If a spellcaster gets a bonus spell to a higher level spell, however, he/she cannot use it until he/she can cast spells of that level. As to why spellcasters don't get bonus 0 - level spells I'm not quite sure.
3rd Question: I haven't looked at the rules for that particular spell, but I guess it could be safe to assume that one could make a disk for oneself, as long as it doesn't directly state that one cannot.
I hoped this helps...(and that I didn't give any false info...I've done that before...) |
