Basic Fantasy RPG Forums

daryen wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 9:02 am1) It originally made reference to spells in New Spells that were then moved to Libram Magica. I am moving all such spells into this supplement. One example is Minor Warding. There are others. Is that OK? Also, is it OK to just blindly pull the spells from Libram Magica, or should I be concerned about power issues?

New Spells was expanded by another contributor in ways I disagreed with; I removed those spells as I did not want the supplement moving the way it was. Libram Magica picked up everything, as it's not "official" it has served as a very handy place to keep those things I'm unsure about.

So yes, bring spellcrafter-specific magic to this supplement, it's the correct solution.

daryen wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 9:02 am2) Spellcrafters get a +1 saving throw against effects from magic items. That's OK. However, they also impose a -1 adjustment on others when they use a magic item. That seems a bit unbalancing. I recommend that the -1 adjustment part just be outright dropped. Getting a minor bonus for themselves is fine. Forcing something on everyone else seems a big much. May I remove that?

No, leave it. 5% isn't a big advantage, and it's been that way so far. I may want to review the class in more detail though... not sure why I didn't drop it to the Showcase when I split up the Downloads page. We used to have just two places to put things, and everything ended up on Downloads when complete... but when the list got really long, and some of the supplements were iffy, I created the Showcase and kicked out everything I didn't feel comfortable with. I must have felt the supplement was pretty solid, but I don't remember reviewing it.

daryen wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 9:02 am3) They use a couple Druid spells. Should I keep the reference to the Druid supplement, or should I duplicate them here? In general, I would expect each supplement to be reasonably stand-alone, but at the same time others (like the updated New Spells Supplement) will refer to other supplements. Even so, I really do think the class supplements should be stand-alone with their only real dependency being the Core Rules.

Yes, class supplements should stand alone with respect to other classes... no class supplement should ever depend on another class supplement. But the copied spells need to be exactly the same, or be renamed, one or the other.

Magic Mirror can remain as is in the supplement for the moment. Scry can be a separate thing.

OK, taking the incremental approach Solo recommended elsewhere, here is an update to the Spellcaster Supplement. Pretty much all of the changes are noted with comments in the document. Broadly speaking, I did the following:
- Moved all spells not in the Core Rules into this Supplement. There were several.
- Made the headers more consistent using the guidelines I used for the other supplements.
- Fixed a few typos.
- Fixed one spell description (Neutralize Potion). I did NOT change the mechanics, just how it was described.

Of the eleven spells from Libram Magica, one was modified. The others were taken verbatim. The one changed was Magic Mirror. It was modified to be a little more like a crystal ball, though it still has no chance to fail.

The four spells from the Druid Supplement and the one spell from the Illusionist Supplement were taken verbatim. No changes were made. I took the Dream from the Illusionist Supplement, not Libram Magica.

The two spells from the New Spells Supplement were also taken verbatim.

I assume the spells taken from New Spells and Libram Magica will need to be deleted from those documents.

However, should I have renamed the spells taken from Druid and Illusionist? Even if they are exactly the same now, anyone doing modifications in the future would have to know they are repeated in order to keep them in sync. Now that I think about it, I think I should have renamed them. Should I go and rename them?

New Spells should stand on its own. Only spells usable only by spellcrafters would be deleted; any spell shared by other classes/subclasses which don't also appear in their supplements would remain.

Libram Magica should be left alone for now.

OK, I'll leave them all alone for now and let the spells be duplicates. (They have the same descriptions, so that should be OK. It isn't like Animate Dead/Re-Animation where the descriptions were different.)

Any New Spells concerns I'll raise in New Spells.

So, I'll leave Spellcrafter as I submitted it for this version.

If you want a spellcrafter image, here's one:

Very nice!

I made some mistakes on my r4 submission, so I am refreshing it here. I assume I have to bump it to r5 because of that.

The mistakes were: Resist Cold, Resist Fire, and Hold Portal are Core Rule spells that don't need descriptions. Don't know how I missed that, but I did. Also, I just copied Protection from Lightning from the Druid Supplement. That doesn't work because it references Protection from Fire. So, changed this Protection from Lightning to have Protection from Fire's wording (with "fire" replaced by "lightning or electrical effect").

Yes, always bump the release number if you change the document even a little.