Magic Dilettante/Rogue

[Rick_Smith]

Originally Posted by tbeard1999

Three objections - first, this adds three special rules that contradict the text in Wizard. This creates an opportunity for misreading the rules. "The rules say that spell costs 1 ST." "Yes, but the special rules say that rogues pay an extra 2 ST." Etc.

Second, I think that you may have made the spells unattractive, bordering on useless. ...

Hi everyone, Ty.
Lots of rules modify base rules. Dwarves can carry double mass when calculating encumbrance. I do not see this as a problem. It is parsimonious design to modify existing rules rather than repeat slightly different rules in their entirety. (In the Dwarf rules I could repeat the full rules for encumbrance but with the masses doubled. But then the difference could easily be missed as well as multiplying the rule book size, if this was done often.)


As for Rogues spending 2 fST more for a spell, you could make it 1 fST. But there is another thing, if all spells cost more, then some spells become more attractive than others. A Fire spell (1 fST) is strongly affected, where as the Staff spell (5 fST but not in combat) or Summon Demon (50 fST) are barely changed.

This results in the ideal MIX of spells by a rogue being different than for a normal wizard. More variation is a good thing.

Now you might argue, we want Rogues to have weaker (lower fST) spells in the mix, in which case my suggested rule is encouraging the opposite of what we want. If you wanted Dilettante / Rogues to prefer low cost spells, you could write the rule that the cost of the spell is increased by 1.33 times, round DOWN. (So spells that cost 1 fST or 2 fST would not change but everything above that, would get more expensive.)

This would make Rogues greatly prefer weaker spells, but if they REALLY want to throw a 5d-5 damage Fireball, they could do so. But they would pay 1 extra fST for the cost.

Warm regards, Rick.

[tbeard1999]

Originally Posted by Rick_Smith

Hi everyone, Ty.
Lots of rules modify base rules. Dwarves can carry double mass when calculating encumbrance. I do not see this as a problem. It is parsimonious design to modify existing rules rather than repeat slightly different rules in their entirety. (In the Dwarf rules I could repeat the full rules for encumbrance but with the masses doubled. But then the difference could easily be missed as well as multiplying the rule book size, if this was done often.)


As for Rogues spending 2 fST more for a spell, you could make it 1 fST. But there is another thing, if all spells cost more, then some spells become more attractive than others. A Fire spell (1 fST) is strongly affected, where as the Staff spell (5 fST but not in combat) or Summon Demon (50 fST) are barely changed.

This results in the ideal MIX of spells by a rogue being different than for a normal wizard. More variation is a good thing.

Now you might argue, we want Rogues to have weaker (lower fST) spells in the mix, in which case my suggested rule is encouraging the opposite of what we want. If you wanted Dilettante / Rogues to prefer low cost spells, you could write the rule that the cost of the spell is increased by 1.33 times, round DOWN. (So spells that cost 1 fST or 2 fST would not change but everything above that, would get more expensive.)

This would make Rogues greatly prefer weaker spells, but if they REALLY want to throw a 5d-5 damage Fireball, they could do so. But they would pay 1 extra fST for the cost.

Warm regards, Rick.

I think I'd want to try my system first. If it poses the problems you fear, then I'd implement some or all of your solution. I would limit Rogues to (say) IQ 12 spells.

Now for the hard part: What price should Rogues pay for having this ability? A Rogue talent perhaps: IQ 11, Rogue (1) allows Rogue spellcasting; must be taken concurrently with at least 2 spells (representing past spellcaster training).