Limiting number of spells on Cleric spell list

[Joshua Randall]

I believe it is a fairly common house rule to limit the number of spells on the Cleric spell list, so that Clerics don't become enormously powerful (and enormously laden down with infinitely long spell lists). I think it is also a good idea to allow a Cleric to use a spell from a supplemental source if and only if the Cleric gives up access to a Player's Handbook spell of the same level.

Well, even if this isn't common practice, it's what I am going to do. I would like some help (1) deciding how many spells should be on the Cleric's list at each level and (2) refining this house rule so that it doesn't unduly punish players for using supplemental sources, but is also not prone to abuse.

In the following table, PH # is a count of the spells listed at the front of the Spells chapter - which means that some spells, like Protection from Evil/Good/Chaos/Law are being counted as one rather than multiples (but I'm okay with that). The number in the Harsh column would limit the Cleric to a number of spells -- from all sources -- that is generally near or less than the number in the PH. The number in the Lenient column would relax the limit on the Cleric, allowing him more leeway to select spells from a variety of sources before he has to start giving up PH spells.

[font=Courier New]Level   PH #   Harsh   Lenient[/font]
[font=Courier New]=====   ====   =====   =======[/font]
[font=Courier New]  0	  12	  10	   15[/font]
[font=Courier New]  1	  25	 (25)*	 35[/font]
[font=Courier New]  2	  32	  30	   35[/font]
[font=Courier New]  3	  31	  30	   35[/font]
[font=Courier New]  4	  23	  25	   30[/font]
[font=Courier New]  5	  24	  25	   30[/font]
[font=Courier New]  6	  26	  25	   30[/font]
[font=Courier New]  7	  18	  15	   20[/font]
[font=Courier New]  8	  17	  15	   20[/font]
[font=Courier New]  9	  11	  10	   15[/font]
 
[font=Courier New]* could make this 30 for better symmetry[/font]
[font=Courier New][font=Verdana]

[/font][/font]

In both the Harsh and Lenient columns, I have tried for some crude symmetry, to make it easier to remember how many spells you're allowed at each level.

First question: do you think these are reasonable numbers of spells to allow? Too many? Too few?

Remember that Clerics can switch their spell selection every day, and that there are quite a few weak or overly specific PH spells that can be pruned without much difficulty.

The way I would work this house rule is that at each level of spells, the player can select the indicated number (Harsh or Lenient, depending upon the type of campaign I want to run) of spells from any source that I allow. For each non-PH spell that the Cleric selects as part of his spell list, he must permanently give up access to a PH spell of the same level.

Some refining of the above. When you give up access to a spell, you give up access to all versions of it. So, if you give up access to Protection from Good, you are also giving up access to Protection from Evil/Chaos/Law as well. That should prevent my clever munchkins -- er, I mean, my beloved players -- from giving up access to spells they were never going to cast anyway (such as Protection from Good for a cleric of Pelor).

Also, if you give up access to a spell that is part of a chain, you are giving up access to that spell and all higher level versions of it. For example, if you give up access to Summon Monster IV, then you have also given up access to Summon Monsters V, VI, VII, VIII, and IX. Again, this is to prevent clerics from cherry picking which spells from a chain are the most powerful and blithely giving up access to all the other versions. I particularly want to avoid something like a PC saying, "Now that I'm 7th level, I'll ditch cure light wounds." Well, he can say that, but only if he is willing to pay a very steep price; i.e., the loss of all other cure spells.

Next. When a new source of spells is introduced into the campaign, each player may peruse these new spells and swap some into his clerical spell list freely -- although he is still limited to the total number of spells from the table above, of course. Also, he may only replace non-PH spells in this free manner. This is to allow the entry of new spells without punishing clerics for whatever choices they have made up to that time. (If he wants to add a spell from a new source, he can permanently eliminate yet another PH spell from his list, too.)

So... what do you guys think? Is this a good idea? Workable? Abuseable in some way I have not anticipated? Let me have it!

 

[Terath Ninir]

I think you should go with the more lenient idea.

I don't think you'll need the spell chains idea. I would flat-out rule that "positive" clerics can't dump cure spells, and "negative" clerics can't drop inflict spells. After all, one of their core abilities is hinged on the spells, so they shouldn't be able to remove them.

As for, say, the Summon spells, most clerics I know would never *use* the low-level ones, anyway, so I don't think that would be a huge loss. Your mileage may vary, of course.

Let us know how this works. Sounds like an interesting experiment.

 

[Aaron2]

So... what do you guys think? Is this a good idea? Workable? Abuseable in some way I have not anticipated? Let me have it!

I'm toying with the idea of requiring Clerics to have a spellbook. Scribing into the book is free but it would require the player seek out access to any new, weird, spells. Each church has its own list of divinly favored spells they give out to their clerics (i.e. controlled by the DM).


Aaron

 

[Terath Ninir]

I'm toying with the idea of requiring Clerics to have a spellbook. Scribing into the book is free but it would require the player seek out access to any new, weird, spells. Each church has its own list of divinly favored spells they give out to their clerics (i.e. controlled by the DM).

That could be a workable idea, too. Ed Greenwood toyed with that in his 1e Pages from the Mages articles. He had a couple druid spells in a spellbook or two. It seems like a good idea for exotic spells.

I really wish there was an easy way to convert the AU idea of simple/complex/exotic spells to the Core rules. That would make this sort of thing easy.

 

[the Jester]

I've been considering something similar with wizards- a setting along the lines of the Dying Earth stories, where most spells are lost. I was considering dropping the number of 'standard' or commonly known wizard spells down to about 12-16 per level (less at high levels).

There'd still be scrolls of other spells out there, but research would be very difficult (increased DCs), item creation would be very limited, etc. It wouldn't be precisely low-magic- there wouldn't be much magic, but the party's only item might be quite powerful! (Maybe at 4th level they find a cube of force or something.)

It would be a very interesting game... I was really debating how to run cleric types, and hadn't yet decided. This seems like an intersting way to approach it.

 

[Joshua Randall]

Some excellent suggestions here. Thanks to everyone who has posted.

I don't think you'll need the spell chains idea. I would flat-out rule that "positive" clerics can't dump cure spells, and "negative" clerics can't drop inflict spells. After all, one of their core abilities is hinged on the spells, so they shouldn't be able to remove them.

Great idea, and much more elegant than my clumsy solution. Consider this idea YOINKed.

As for, say, the Summon spells, most clerics I know would never *use* the low-level ones, anyway, so I don't think that would be a huge loss.

The fact that the low-level summon spells aren't a huge lose is precisely the point. I want the player to have to make a conscious choice of which PH spells he gives up in order to gain supplemental spells. It's too easy to give up the low-level summons with no real loss of power, while picking up some juicy, overpowered low-level spells from other sources (*cough*FRCS*cough*).

However, under my proposed system, giving up summon monster i would mean giving up the whole chain. Thus, at higher levels, you would be giving up summoning bralani eladrin (vi), Huge elementals (vii), and celestial dire bears (viii) [my personal favorite].

I'm toying with the idea of requiring Clerics to have a spellbook. Scribing into the book is free but it would require the player seek out access to any new, weird, spells.

Definitely a workable idea, especially the part about requiring players to seek access to nonstandard spells from their church. However, my main purpose in limiting the number of spells per level is so that I do not have to approve individually each spell the player wants to add. I can simply tell the player, "You can have 30 4th level spells" and then let him sort out which ones they are.

I really wish there was an easy way to convert the AU idea of simple/complex/exotic spells to the Core rules.

Expand upon this idea, please? I do not own Arcana Unearthed.

I've been considering something similar with wizards- a setting along the lines of the Dying Earth stories, where most spells are lost.

I think wizards are a lot easier to handle, because other than the 2 free spells on level up, they only gain spells known when the DM lets them. The DM decides which arcane scrolls get placed in treasure hordes, which enemy spellbooks are recoverable (and what spells they contain), and whether NPC wizards allow PC wizards to trade with or copy spells from them.

I was really debating how to run cleric types, and hadn't yet decided. This seems like an intersting way to approach it.

I have actually experimented with an earlier, cruder version of this system. It works pretty well in my experience. In fact, if you use something like the lenient numbers, then most clerics won't ever need to give up any PH spells -- they can just add a handful of supplemental spells per level to their lists.

Anyway, thanks again for the comments!

 

[Terath Ninir]

Okay, in Arcana Unearthed, you have simple, complex, and exotic spells. A simple 1st level spell would have a power of 1.0-1.2 (this is just a guesstimate of the power levels; Monte Cook didn't put in any such metagame details). Anyone who is a spellcaster can use the spell. For a D&D equivalent, protection from chaos/evil/good/law would be a simple spell.

A complex 1st level spell would have a power of 1.3-1.6; more powerful than the simple ones, but not quite up to 2nd level power. Magic missile would be a good D&D equivalent. One class, the Magister, has access to all the complex spells, but most casters have limited or no access to them. Another class, the Greenbond, can use any spell with the Plant descriptor. You can also use feats to get access to more spells.

An exotic 1st level spell would have a power of 1.7-1.9: almost 2nd level. They are very hard to come by. A greenbond would have access to any Plant exotic spells, but there are only a couple (if that; it might only be one) of those. Even the magisters don't automatically get them. You can get access to a *single* exotic spell with a feat, if you really want it. I believe there are some other ways to get them, but I'm not 100% familiar with the book yet. I don't think there really are any Core equivalents. Unique spells only found in one spellbook would be the closest thing.

The point is that it is much easier to customize spell lists for classes. The lists are designed to let you do so. Of course, this is all a huge aside from the point of your system.

I see your point on the summon spells. I don't think it's that big of a deal, but I don't mind a certain level of munchkinism.

 

[Particle_Man]

Alternatively, you could limit cleric spells by making them use spells like sorcerors, as shown in "spontaneious clerics" in unearthed arcana, or "favored souls" in complete divine.

 

[Old One]

This has merit...

Alternatively, you could limit cleric spells by making them use spells like sorcerors, as shown in "spontaneious clerics" in unearthed arcana, or "favored souls" in complete divine.

PM -

I actually think this would be a good way to approach it. Essentially, if you buy into an "each cleric has a unique relationship with his/her deity" then a slightly expanded list of "prayers known" (maybe 2-3x the number a sorcerer knows at an equivilant level) + swap for cure/inflict + swap for domain spells could be a way to approach it.

A more involved way would be to group the spells by deity, so not all spells would be open to each cleric.

~ Old One

 

[The Spectrum Rider]

I've outline how we handle this IMC in the thread "Making All Casters Learn Spells." Opinions very welcome.

The Spectrum Rider