Illusionists Supplement
- Solomoriah
- Site Admin
- Posts: 12535
- Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 8:15 pm
- Location: LaBelle, Missouri
- Contact:
Illusionists Supplement
Post your comments on the Illusionists Supplement here.
https://basicfantasy.org/downloads.html#illusionists
https://basicfantasy.org/downloads.html#illusionists
My personal site: www.gonnerman.org
Re: Illusionists Supplement
surprised to see my text edits here. I had thought it might show directly in the almanac but did not expect it here.
Guess I need to jump onto the Druid text now?
Guess I need to jump onto the Druid text now?
Is it really the end, not some crazy dream?
- Solomoriah
- Site Admin
- Posts: 12535
- Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 8:15 pm
- Location: LaBelle, Missouri
- Contact:
Re: Illusionists Supplement
I haven't incorporated the Illusionists or Druids into the Almanack yet. I'm thinking I'll do that, though, when I take out the monsters.
Speaking of monsters...
Speaking of monsters...
My personal site: www.gonnerman.org
Re: Illusionists Supplement
While reviewing this supplement for inclusion to my campaign, I got a minor formatting question with the spells. The spells header block are not formatted as is done in the main rules and other supplements. Specifically, the range and duration are each 1 line lower, which leaves the spell's duration on its own line. I know that this is done other documents where the spell name is very long, which makes sense. This formatting also makes sense in the case where a spell is available to both a magic-user and an illusionist as having these titles on one line takes up too much space. But in this supplement all the spell are like this, so I'm wondering if this was done for a specific reason?
I also found a small typo in the second paragraph the Illusionists Spells section. The second sentence has: "The Illusionist may also learn appropriate spels ...". 'spels' => spells.
I also found a small typo in the second paragraph the Illusionists Spells section. The second sentence has: "The Illusionist may also learn appropriate spels ...". 'spels' => spells.
--
pax et bonum,
frzntoz
pax et bonum,
frzntoz
Re: Illusionists Supplement
This was solely my doing. I departed from Solo's method because I preferred the spell name on one line to itself, then all other data below in a standard way that all spells would follow. Solo prefers (or at least did the last time this was addressed) the way he did it in the core rules, with only the longer named spells having abberrant formatting. I believe he mentioned that it was preferrable to save a number of lines of printing across the document, over any issues of consistency. I felt differently, especially for supplemental material which is generally digital only (being only printed by the end-user), so such thoughts of saving that white-space are not so worrisome.frzntoz wrote:While reviewing this supplement for inclusion to my campaign, I got a minor formatting question with the spells. The spells header block are not formatted as is done in the main rules and other supplements. Specifically, the range and duration are each 1 line lower, which leaves the spell's duration on its own line. I know that this is done other documents where the spell name is very long, which makes sense. This formatting also makes sense in the case where a spell is available to both a magic-user and an illusionist as having these titles on one line takes up too much space. But in this supplement all the spell are like this, so I'm wondering if this was done for a specific reason?
The Libram Magica and other supplements that I re-touched or wrote myself (druid, illusionist, necromancer, etc.) follow the format you see here (as well as edits and slight revisions here and there).
And, I hate when typos are found so long after revisions. This was done several years ago!!
Is it really the end, not some crazy dream?
Re: Illusionists Supplement
There is a typo on the second page in the second paragraph. 3rd line down it reads:
The Illusionist may also learn appropriate 'spels'
Spels should be spells.
The Illusionist may also learn appropriate 'spels'
Spels should be spells.
Re: Illusionists Supplement
r4 with track changes enabled uploaded here.
- Attachments
-
- BF-Illusionist-Supplement-r4.odt
- (113.48 KiB) Downloaded 337 times
- Solomoriah
- Site Admin
- Posts: 12535
- Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 8:15 pm
- Location: LaBelle, Missouri
- Contact:
Re: Illusionists Supplement
Announcing!
Illusionists: A Basic Fantasy Supplement Release 4 -- August 29, 2018
James Lemon and Chris Gonnerman have revised the old standard Illusionist supplement; no rules changes, just cleanups of the prose and corrections to the use of abbreviations and symbols.
http://basicfantasy.org/downloads.html#illusionists
Illusionists: A Basic Fantasy Supplement Release 4 -- August 29, 2018
James Lemon and Chris Gonnerman have revised the old standard Illusionist supplement; no rules changes, just cleanups of the prose and corrections to the use of abbreviations and symbols.
http://basicfantasy.org/downloads.html#illusionists
My personal site: www.gonnerman.org
Re: Illusionists Supplement
- Attachments
-
- illusionsdadillusions.gif (982.24 KiB) Viewed 7133 times
Re: Illusionists Supplement
While looking through the other spellcasters (Druids and Necromancers) I see that Illusionists are incredibly light on spells. They have only 10 first and second level spells each, and only 6 each at the higher levels. For a class that literally has nothing else going for it (no combat, no special abilities, no pets) all it has is cool spells to use. So, I'd like to add two spells to each level directly in the Supplement. Is that worth doing? (I have a pretty good list of suggestions, and they are almost all directly on theme.)
(As with the others, I will cover zero level spells in that supplement, and the seventh level spells in the New Spells Supplement.)
(As with the others, I will cover zero level spells in that supplement, and the seventh level spells in the New Spells Supplement.)
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 58 guests