Troll Lord Games

I've started a series of pdfs that recasts many C&C race/class combinations in a new light. The goal is to make each combination unique, so that being a gnome rogue is wildly different than being a dwarf rogue, and so on. The first one I've written is for the dwarf wizard. If you don't mind, please take a look and see what you think. Here it is: http://freepdfhosting.com/d82243d722.pdf

EDIT: I've considered detailing, briefly, what each dwarf wizard spell is used for in dwarven society. Would that be of interest for this writeup?

Good stuff. YES, a treatment on spells would be great.

It is a cool twist. Between the tablets and spells available I think they have a pretty distinct "flavor" to them. I think writing up how each spell is used would increase their distinctiveness.

I like it. Also, I recognize the font and layout. Did you make a skills document for C&C a while back? I used the crap out of that in a campaign I ran a year or so ago. It was great.

Yep, that was me. I'm glad someone got some use out of it! I wrote a couple of things, one was the skill article and the other was a combat thing that appeared in Troll's Tusk. I'm hoping that something I write will end up in Crusader. Fingers crossed!

Like!

Cool stuff, viv! I concur with Rhu: Like!

I would also enjoy seeing the "Spell Usage by Race."

Interesting. I do like the idea. I especially like the idea that the dwarf race uses only the wizard spells pertinent to their race/culture. I could easily see the dwarves having their own spells or variants of existing spells.

~O

Dwarf wizards... nope. That combo (along with so much else) helped to really sour me on 3e.

With that being said, once Rune Lore is released I'll happily look at that possibility...

Ancalagon wrote:Dwarf wizards... nope. That combo (along with so much else) helped to really sour me on 3e.

With that being said, once Rune Lore is released I'll happily look at that possibility...

Rgr on that. However, your write up is good and could (one day) change my mind about that combo.

That said, if the dward MU is this good, I can't wait till you do the elf MU or halfling thief etc (or maybe a good swashbuckler - nudge nudge

Ancalagon wrote:Dwarf wizards... nope. That combo (along with so much else) helped to really sour me on 3e.

With that being said, once Rune Lore is released I'll happily look at that possibility...

Out of curiosity, did you read the article? The attempt was to make a dwarven wizard seem... dwarven. And that was done by selecting spells that reflected the culture.

My Runemark class, play tested up to 17th level. I never did convert the more unique spells from Winter Rune, though.

RUNEMARKS:
Are a rune based wizard. Plus everything class related is based off of their Wisdom, not intelligence.

Why? Because rune magic is literally based on word fragments of the "Words of Creation". So rune magic, and the fragments of the words of power used, are the ultimate source of all powers, divine and arcane. So they are treated as Divine, but might be able to use arcane items. Arcane item use is explained later.

Advantages: You only need to have your rune in hand to cast the spell and be able to speak the word of power associated with that spell. So all spells are verbal and material only, with the only material being the spell specific rune stone.

So Runemarks can be tied up, but as long as they have the runestone in their hands, and can speak, they can cast the spell. If they do a successful SIEGE check CL=spell level +4 they can cast the spell by will alone. The runestone is still required to be in hand. So even gagged they can still cast a spell if the SIEGE check is successful. Wizards can do this, but to do it bound and gagged would be a CL=spell level +8 to do so.

Rune stones are made out of expensive materials, but are re-useable. Rune stones cost 25 GP for first level, 35 GP for second level, 50 GP for third level, and 100 GP for levels 4 to 6, then 50 GP per level for levels 7 to 9 (350 GP to 450 GP per spell), with certain price exceptions for spells like Wish, etc... Those costs will be double of what is in the PH, but the rune stone is not consumed.


Biggest drawback: Unlike a mage losing a spell book, if you lose your runestones you can't cast another spell until you make new rune stones for the spells you know/have memorized.

Plus Runemark's cannot use Wizard or Illusionist magic items easily. They must make a SIEGE check versus TN 12 + level the item is made at to use it successfully. If they fail the SIEGE check they can never use that particular item until later. If they succeed they can use that particular item, or item power, from then on. Scrolls can never be used in this manner. Potions can be freely used like any other class. Fail the SIEGE check and they can never use that particular item, or item power, until they make another level to get another SIEGE check to try and figure it out.


Rune magic items:

Runemarks cannot cast arcane or divine classed scrolls, nor do they make scrolls. Runesticks are made in place of scrolls, but for all intents and purposes works just like a scroll. Costs of a runestick are twice that of normal scrolls, but otherwise is the same in terms of time to make them.
They use rods, staves, and wands (very similiar looking to runesticks), but they are all rune based, so called Rune Rods, Rune Staves, and Rune Wands. They can also make potions, but the container is used to empower the fluid inside, so rune potion containers are typically bigger than normal potion vials because of this.

Runemark Skills: Runemarks are very good at engraving and carving, as well as identifying metals and gemstones, since they are so crucial to the basics of making runestones and rune items. All checks, when related to runecasting and making rune items, are WIS based. Otherwise it will be related to DEX, or whatever stat the CK considers relevant.

vivsavage wrote:

Ancalagon wrote:Dwarf wizards... nope. That combo (along with so much else) helped to really sour me on 3e.

With that being said, once Rune Lore is released I'll happily look at that possibility...

Out of curiosity, did you read the article? The attempt was to make a dwarven wizard seem... dwarven. And that was done by selecting spells that reflected the culture.

Yeah, I think what you did does give them a more distinct dwarven flavor, and is why I think your doing the spell write ups you mention will strengthen that even more.

vivsavage wrote:

Ancalagon wrote:Dwarf wizards... nope. That combo (along with so much else) helped to really sour me on 3e.

With that being said, once Rune Lore is released I'll happily look at that possibility...

Out of curiosity, did you read the article? The attempt was to make a dwarven wizard seem... dwarven. And that was done by selecting spells that reflected the culture.

Yes, I read the article. I simply disagree with the premise of a dwarven wizard. I see dwarves as great miners and craftsmen (those who choose those professions, anyways) who do not require magic spells to prevent tunnels from collapsing, judging the safety of pursuing veins of ore, or finding lost miners.

Ancalagon wrote:

vivsavage wrote:

Ancalagon wrote:Dwarf wizards... nope. That combo (along with so much else) helped to really sour me on 3e.

With that being said, once Rune Lore is released I'll happily look at that possibility...

Out of curiosity, did you read the article? The attempt was to make a dwarven wizard seem... dwarven. And that was done by selecting spells that reflected the culture.

Yes, I read the article. I simply disagree with the premise of a dwarven wizard. I see dwarves as great miners and craftsmen (those who choose those professions, anyways) who do not require magic spells to prevent tunnels from collapsing, judging the safety of pursuing veins of ore, or finding lost miners.

Well, based on mythology they wield/make magic (not the Clerical type). Even in Tolkien works.

Arduin wrote:

Ancalagon wrote:

vivsavage wrote:

Ancalagon wrote:Dwarf wizards... nope. That combo (along with so much else) helped to really sour me on 3e.

With that being said, once Rune Lore is released I'll happily look at that possibility...

Out of curiosity, did you read the article? The attempt was to make a dwarven wizard seem... dwarven. And that was done by selecting spells that reflected the culture.

Yes, I read the article. I simply disagree with the premise of a dwarven wizard. I see dwarves as great miners and craftsmen (those who choose those professions, anyways) who do not require magic spells to prevent tunnels from collapsing, judging the safety of pursuing veins of ore, or finding lost miners.

Well, based on mythology they wield/make magic (not the Clerical type). Even in Tolkien works.

I actually have a problem with it too. Even today. I think its because my first 5 years of gaming was mostly 1E AD&D, and so its dwarves are NOT magic users just got really ingrained into my brain. I'm fine with them being Runemarks, though, but that is because the Aihrde setting convinced me to.

For what its worth, I don't really see the 'wizards' in my version being true mages. They don't have a theory of magic or even have the ability to manipulate it. They carve runic inscriptions on tablets and then read (or perhaps trace) the runes. It is the runes on the tablets that have the power, not the dwarves themselves.

"The dwarves of yore made mighty spells, While hammers fell like ringing bells. In places deep, where dark things sleep, In hollow halls beneath the fells."

I like it.
It does make this version of Mage very Dwarven.
I used to be anti dwarf magic, but then the 3e all races/all classes thing grew on me (Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations?). but to stay on topic, I think this interpretation works. It's more of a magic craftsman than a real wizard and the spell list is so tight and themed that it feels very Dwarfish, IMO.

Looking forward to the others!

Treebore wrote:

Arduin wrote:

Ancalagon wrote:

vivsavage wrote:

Ancalagon wrote:Dwarf wizards... nope. That combo (along with so much else) helped to really sour me on 3e.

With that being said, once Rune Lore is released I'll happily look at that possibility...

Out of curiosity, did you read the article? The attempt was to make a dwarven wizard seem... dwarven. And that was done by selecting spells that reflected the culture.

Yes, I read the article. I simply disagree with the premise of a dwarven wizard. I see dwarves as great miners and craftsmen (those who choose those professions, anyways) who do not require magic spells to prevent tunnels from collapsing, judging the safety of pursuing veins of ore, or finding lost miners.

Well, based on mythology they wield/make magic (not the Clerical type). Even in Tolkien works.

I actually have a problem with it too. Even today. I think its because my first 5 years of gaming was mostly 1E AD&D, and so its dwarves are NOT magic users just got really ingrained into my brain. I'm fine with them being Runemarks, though, but that is because the Aihrde setting convinced me to.

I rebelled against the 1E restrictions in my early years, so dwarven wizards seem natural to me. I get where you're coming from, though. I have a hard time wrapping my mind around non-human paladins for some reason. I solved that problem (for different reasons) by banning paladins from my games.

Thanks for all the feedback, guys. I'm adding flavor background to each spell as we speak and will repost it. Next I'm going to create a gnome knight class.

I really appreciate and like it! I'd be very interested in flavourful "racial spells": I'm all for "any race - any class" style of game, differently from the race -class restrictions of 1st and 2nd editions, so I really like this Dwarven Rune Wizard!
Thanks for sharing and keep up with your good work!
Galannor

I want to be clear, I do "get it" about no Dwarf wizards... but I also appreciate the flexibility if the option is available. My default position is "yes" as a DM, it's a game, and yes is fun... within reason.

(and in some games, dwarven wizards are not reasonable).

I just want to be clear that I wasn't intentionally insulting anyone's position.
(I don't think anyone took it that way, but I'm a sensitive guy LOL)