Optional Rules for individual Spell development?

[alloowishus]

I am starting to think that learning spell lists does not really work very well, I start players at higher levels (3rd or 4th for spell users). Pretty soon they have 7 or 8 lists and have some 40 to 50 spells to choose from, it's pretty overwhelming. And let's face it, most of them are useless or repeats. I heard there were some optional rules for developing individual spells, does anyone know where those are?

I was thinking of something like the cost is lvlx2xspell list rank cost. So a pure spell user would spend 2 DP learning a first level spell (no rolling) and a semi spell user would spend 8 DP. This makes it more D&Dish which I actually think works better.

[Sulimo]

That is one of the optional rules (it's inspired from RMSS/FRP).

Spell Law 3.2, option 2.2.

https://i.imgur.com/4oPO61n.png

[Majyk]

Even though “most of them are useless” - unless you’re shooting for nothing but combat spells, let the lists get developed!

Too often we have Munchkins in our games coming from other ones where the seemingly useless spells would never be accessed/bought vs attack or defence ones.

As an example, something simple like 1st lvl “Heat Solid” is very much a life saving spell in any game with cold terrain travel…think about the spell being used like the old Star Trek episodes where someone shoots a phaser at a larger rock to keep everyone warm.
That or other uses a GM would never expect. Keep ‘em all, man, keep ‘em all and expand the game rules for your otherwise useless game rules like ‘that other game’. :o

[dunadan]

Spell Law 3.2, option 2.2.



This is the option that I always used in my campaign. I think it offered best choice. Especially for low level casters ie spend DP's to definitely acquire a couple of spells from multiple lists. Rather than spend a few DP's and risk not getting any spells. Or spend a lot and guarantee a list (including a heap that will be too high level for you to cast).