Goodman Games

Testing out this new house rule:

http://ravencrowking.blogspot.ca/2012/0 ... ls-on.html

A wizard or elf may attempt to learn a spell he is aware of without spending the requisite time to study, but such an attempt is hazardous. First off, the character must make a check against DC 10 + the spell level as part of an attempt to cast the spell. The check consists of 1d16 + caster level + Intelligence modifier.

If this check fails, the character cannot learn the spell until he gains another level. Moreover, the character suffers a misfire from the attempted spell. If this check results in a natural "1" the check automatically fails, and the would-be caster suffers corruption as well.

If the character succeeds, he has learned the spell! However, the hap-hazard method of learning requires a second Mercurial Magic check with a -4 penalty to the roll. The effects of both Mercurial Magic checks take place whenever the wizard or elf casts this spell.

----

Thoughts?

I dunno. It makes sense from a narrative perspective, but I don't see a player really wanting to do that unless they had a choice. To me, it sort of speaks to DCC's assumption that leveling happens between adventures.
In the Barrowmaze we've been leveling ad-hoc, which is totally nice for a PbM game, but I guess this is one of the drawbacks. But it's all good if the party is large and the player has another couple of characters to play...

Actually, the book is pretty explicit that levelling happens when it does, rather than the standard assumption in earlier D&D that XP are only gained, and levelling only occurs, between adventures...or when a safe place is reached. It is also explicit that, for the wizard (and presumably the elf), the ability to gain spells does not mean that those spells are gained.

The "time off" is probably intended as a means to help control the wizard's rise to power, and I don't want to mess with that too much before having a more thorough understanding of game play. But I do want the wizard to be able to take a gamble if game play makes it seem as though it is worth it.

Assuming a +1 Intelligence modifier, and a 1st level spell, the caster would have 1d16+2 vs a DC of 11, succeeding on a roll of 9 to 16, or 50% of the time. It should be noted that a character could potentially burn Luck to make the initial check successful.

As a possible option, I might change the house rule so that you only have one chance to learn the spell "on the fly", but that this doesn't interfere with your normal chances to learn the spell through study. In fact, if it was desirable for characters to take these sorts of risks, it might even give a bonus to the normal attempt.

What do you think about that?



I agree with this.

I imagine that, optimally, every player would have a "stable" of potential PCs all operating in the same milieu, with their own interests and intersecting lives.

RC

The book is explicit about how spells are gained, and your house rule is at least a compromise with that. The problem is that the Wizard class pages and the rules for gaining spells are at opposite ends of the book. It'll work out, assuming the wizard can get back to town safely. Having the ability to try and learn a spell fast in the face of mortal danger is better than being killed because the fledgling spell-slinger has no spells.

I will be definitely using this rule when I get around to running my campaign where the PCs are born as slaves, trapped inside the body of a purple worm. Once they break out and begin adventuring, it's pretty unlikely they'll find weeks to sit around and study.

What do you think about the possible modification, in red, in my previous post?

I like it. I don't think it's worth the risk considering how terrible Herman's stats are currently. Strength is about the only skill he has that's even a wash, much less a positive bonus. If I had a better bonus I'd definitely give it a try. As it stands, only an emergency will make me risk it.

HOUSE RULE REWRITE: Learning Spells on the Fly, or, The Slippery Slope of Arcane Doom

A wizard or elf may attempt to learn a spell he is aware of without spending the requisite time to study, but such an attempt is hazardous. First off, the character must make a check against DC 10 + the spell level as part of an attempt to cast the spell. The initial check consists of 1d16 + caster level + Intelligence modifier.

If this check fails, the character suffers a misfire from the attempted spell. If this check results in a natural "1" the check automatically fails, and the would-be caster suffers corruption as well. In addition, in the event of a natural "1", all subsequent attempts to learn the same spell on the fly reduce the die used for the check, as per the die chain.

However, each failed attempt also gives a +1 bonus to learning the spell if normal research is then used, to a maximum bonus of +4.

If the character succeeds, he has learned the spell! However, the hap-hazard method of learning requires a second Mercurial Magic check with a -4 penalty to the roll. The effects of both Mercurial Magic checks take place whenever the wizard or elf casts this spell.


Thoughts?

Looking over it I like this more. I really like the cumulative bonus if the spell fails to get quickie cast, and I like the use of the dice chain for fumbles. I am quite satisfied with this.

Then that is the rule.

This House Rule / Philosophy fits really well with the Harold Shea (Complete Compleat Enchanter) style of magic.

Very much what I was going for!

BTW, that is a great user name!

Thank you for the feedback!

Here is another one: http://ravencrowking.blogspot.ca/2012/0 ... d-way.html

Nice.

Here is the relevant section from my own Houserule Doc. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jX-DfeTq6ItVZN-yj04EE4YfqdpuOOGLhrnzvU-XYVg/edit?hl=en_US



I reckon, you could go further to Master(d24) if you were at least 5th level, went on a quest and spent 1d6x1000 or something...

Also nice.

I reckon you could go further to Master too, but I didn't want to codify that just yet. Especially, I didn't want to add anything that disrupted the base DCs without thinking about it long and hard. Not letting the numbers get too high is a key to that, but Mastery would be cool for higher-level folks.......

I am reading Appendix N fiction of late....a lot of it....and it meshes with this game so very, very well.

This weekend I am working on gods for my Shanthopal setting. I'm going to strive to make each god unique in terms of what constitutes sin, deity requests, and in some cases, unique spells and/or disapproval charts. Some gods might even have modified clerics if I get that ambitious. Anyway, more than a weekend's worth of work, but I hope to start tomorrow.