PDA

View Full Version : Prepared spells



Aleolus
01-18-2008, 10:45 AM
OK, how many of you DMs actually keep track of what spells your casters prepare, for characters that prepare spells ahead of time (Cleric, Druid, Wizard, etc)? I find it tiresome, but if you don't, then the casters are way overpowered, because they can do four Fireballs per day, or any other combination of powerful spells.

Riftwalker
01-18-2008, 10:58 AM
I plan to keep track of it for the Semndon's Apprentice game.

Drohem
01-18-2008, 11:10 AM
Well, as a GM I don't actually track it. I make the players track it. Usually they write down their generic daily spell list. If they need to adjust it for a specific encounter, then they tell me that in game.

DrAwkward
01-18-2008, 11:28 AM
For players, they do need to prepare specific spells in my games. Its one of the balancing factors of the game.

For NPCs, I usually only pick the top two levels of spells, since they usually won't live long enough to cast the lower level stuff.

Riftwalker
01-18-2008, 11:30 AM
When you said "your casters" I assumed that you meant the NPCs flinging magic at the PCs.

I won't keep track of PCs' spells, but I expect them to. The DM having some insight into what spells PCs have prepared can also be handy for either balancing encounters or making them more interesting, though there are also reasons for keeping it a surprise.

InfoStorm
01-18-2008, 11:44 AM
As I have way too much fun making characters, I normally have a list of prepated spells for those caster that require it, but if I'm winging it, I just track spell slots used.

I like having the spells ahead of time because I use the spells from the casters to hep balance the encounter, as the challenge supplied by an Enchanter is much different from those of a Druid/Conjurer, compaired to an Evoker, compaired to a "Divine Might" Cleric.

Farcaster
01-18-2008, 12:05 PM
I trust my players to keep track of their own spell lists. For NPCs, I usually print up a sheet and just mark off the spells as I go. However, I am now experimenting with spell points in my current game, so we'll see how that goes.

rabkala
01-18-2008, 06:53 PM
I tell my players to make a spell list, but usually do not check up on them. Once in a great while, when they suddenly come up with the perfect spell or a spell I haven't seen them cast forever, I will ask to see their spell list. The occasional check will keep them honest.

tesral
01-19-2008, 03:06 AM
Players track it. I'm more generous as we don't use fire and forget, but you still have a fixed number known and a fixed number per day. Generally a caster knows twice as many spells as they can cast and prepares as many different spells as they can cast for a given day.

Clerics do not memorize, they have the whole list at their prayer beads. They just have to track numbers of spells.

Aleolus
01-19-2008, 10:34 AM
Clerics do not memorize, they have the whole list at their prayer beads. They just have to track numbers of spells.


Actually, Clerics pray for certain spells from their deity. They know of all the Cleric spells that the DM is willing to let them have access to, but they have to pray for access to a particular spell at any one time. The only thing Clerics don't need to pray for is Cure/Inflict spells, as they can spontaneously convert prepared spells into one of those, depending on their alignment.

nijineko
01-19-2008, 10:42 AM
i play spontaneous casters almost exclusively. preferably psionics. or sorcerers and favored souls with runestaffs and scrolls otherwise. =D otherwise i agonize over choices and slow everyone else down waiting for me to make up both of my minds. so i'm doing my groups a favor that way. my personal ideal of a caster? beholder mage. (now if i could just get that in an ecl'ed flavor....)

Grimwell
01-19-2008, 12:27 PM
I trust my characters to keep track of it where their character class mandates that they should. Spell memorization is a part of the balance to the game and I stick with it. I don't check it obsessively and treat them like cheaters, but I do make it clear that a wizard has to prepare spells (as does a cleric, etc.) and my game does not break that rule.

MortonStromgal
01-19-2008, 05:28 PM
I remind them. As a player I don't mind so much anymore as I really like that the clerics can now swap out for heals and that wizards can just leave some slots open for non-combat spells (or combat if you have the downtime to prep them between encounters)

tesral
01-19-2008, 10:47 PM
Actually, Clerics pray for certain spells from their deity.

I was speaking of how I work it. Clerics do not have to prep spells at all.

nijineko
01-21-2008, 10:46 AM
lucky clerics. any other goodies you give them?

ignimbrite
01-21-2008, 03:17 PM
I always do a complete spell list for all my spellcasting NPCs - which gets a little complicated when they get to high levels. I think it is only fair to prep spells ahead of time like a player does. But I do use eTools and the like to make the choosing go faster.

tesral
01-21-2008, 06:00 PM
lucky clerics. any other goodies you give them?

A firm grip on the rules of their religion and a god that actually looks over their shoulders. Along with easy spell access is hewling to the goals and tenets of the religion. With great power comes ... and all that.

I vary the religions considerablly both in spells and granted abilities.

underdarkshark
01-21-2008, 06:27 PM
trust goes a long way. Double crossing the DM gets your head shrinked. Seriously, the players should and do keep track imo experiances. I personally have never had to look over a player's shoulder in the past, if i felt the need i guess i would keep track to keep him/her honest. but then again, if i had to do all that i might just forget to tell him/her the gaming night and time changed. heh

cplmac
01-22-2008, 01:25 PM
I also go by the thought that clerics are granted their spells by their dieties. If they do something out of class or against their religion, then they find that a spell doesn't work that time it is cast, however, I have not had that much of a problem with them.

Mages and the like are restricted to the number of spells that they can have memorized at any given time. If they cast a spell, then they have to rememorize it. I have had players have their character memorize some of their more useful spells more than once, so that they are able to cast it more than once before having to rememorize it. Again, I have not had a problem with a player trying to cheat our system. I do allow the ability to be memorizing while traveling, so long as the mage has access to their spell book and is either riding a mount or riding in a cart or something like it.

For NPC's, I just list all the spells that they have to use and check them off as it is cast. Usually they don't get to cast to many of them if the party does their combat right (by targeting the magic users and clerics first so that they can't cast after being hit by an attack. This also applies to the PC's also).

DrAwkward
01-22-2008, 01:36 PM
(by targeting the magic users and clerics first so that they can't cast after being hit by an attack. This also applies to the PC's also).

Ew. What system is this rule from?

Maelstrom
01-22-2008, 01:45 PM
Sounds like 2nd edition.

You can do it in 3rd, but it requires a readied action or being adjacent to get an attack of opportunity.

cplmac
01-22-2008, 02:26 PM
Ew. What system is this rule from?



Yes, this is playing AD&D 2nd Edition. I have also had many computer games that apply this ruling. I like it, since it makes the players think of who they are going to attack first, as opposed to just randomly going after whoever.

Dravion
01-22-2008, 04:48 PM
Back when I GM'ed games, I would before each game get a list of the spells the spell casters would want to use. Ofcourse keeping within the allowed number of spells per level. Now as to however many they used the day, I trusted them to be honest. As I was honest about not altering my monsters to over-power their spells. But I like keeping track of what spells are in the books of the players. Cause sometimes, and I kick myself when it happens, I would suggest a spell that "might help them out that day". Turns out it does and I kick myself, because it took something away that I was planing on doing. But it all ends up good in the end. It's just fun like that. lol

MysticalForest
02-02-2008, 04:57 PM
I've never played a campaign with anyone, ever, who didn't track their spells (assuming they were playing a wizard and not a sorcerer).

The very idea of the DM tracking it, or it not being tracked at all, is ... completely alien.

tesral
02-02-2008, 05:56 PM
I've never played a campaign with anyone, ever, who didn't track their spells (assuming they were playing a wizard and not a sorcerer).

The very idea of the DM tracking it, or it not being tracked at all, is ... completely alien.

Yea, why should the DM do all the work?

Many years ago I made a switch in my game that makes all wizards more like sorcerers. They have the normal wizard spell slots and number of spells, but use spells like the sorcorer class does now. Makes the sorcorer rather useless in my game, so we don't have them. Fire and forget never made a lot of sense to me.

Keep in mind that the oposing mages have the same abilities. Balance is maintained.