By permantent spells I meant ones like Alchemy, etc, whose effects are permanent. This would primarily be creation spells, I don’t think many others would qualify…
I’m just heading home from work now. I’ll take a look through what’s I’ve come up with so far and see if I can’t post an updated version later. I’ll have to run through a few examples and then see how they work and make changes based on the results of those examples.
cool 
thnx
Originally posted by tcharazazel@Apr 28 2004, 02:01 AM
heheh, now what about adding metamagic to the spells and thus increasing the spell level of the spell. ie if you use maximized fireball and lightning the spell level would be 6 lvl. So the cost would be for both in the spell:
I would not allow the metamagic feats in the PHB to apply to Realm Spells. They are different beasts in this regards. Remember that almost all metamagic feats require usage of a spell slot of higher level than the one being meta’d. Now this doesn’t really translate for Realm Spells, since there is no spells per day type of concept for them. Basically a spellcaster can only cast 1 realm spell per domain action anyway.
Originally posted by tcharazazel@Apr 27 2004, 10:05 PM
[b] um irdeggman, what part didnt you understand of the quote?
cause im not following what the comment was about…
[/b]
I’m not sure which post of mine you are referring to.
I am assuming it is the one about different costs for researching spells that are known versus researching new spells. That was how I read your original post that there should be 2 different costs to research a spell, one for the ‘standard’ realm spells (i.e., those to be listed in the BRCS) and one for any new spells researched (new ones or variations of other spells that the character creates.).
This is what I was refering to. There are not 2 separate sets of costs to research a spell in 3.5. There is only one set or formula to be used regardless if it is a spell listed in the BRCS or not. The costing formulas that Ian has been working on and proposing make no distinction between a spell listed in the BRCS, something totally new or creating a variation of an already known spell.
Originally posted by Raesene Andu@Apr 28 2004, 08:56 AM
By permantent spells I meant ones like Alchemy, etc, whose effects are permanent. This would primarily be creation spells, I don’t think many others would qualify…
In this case I think it would be prudent to go with a deffinition of permanent closer to the one already established in the core rules. A permanent spell in 3e can be detected and dispelled after it has been cast, as opposed to instantaneous spells. To my knowledge the alchemy spell creates true gold/valuables that cannot be discerned from the mundane equivalent and cannot be dispelled.
Cheers
E
Unfortunately there appears to be no easy way to come up with a system to divine the method used to set GB and RP costs in 2nd edition, most likely because there is not system, each spell has been individually balanced.
So creating a system that fits all the old realm spells and explains how to work out their GB and RP costs is impossible as far as I can tell. That leaves you with a choice.
The system I posted can give you some very rough guidelines, but is by no mean a good system, just a rough example of something that can be done. It is very difficult to put across what is a very complex way of choosing how a realm spell act in just a few simple rules.
Here’s an example spell I’ve designed using a slighly modified version of the design rules I posted.
Cure Plague
(Conjuration)
Spell Level: Divine 6
Gold: 2 GB
Regency: 4 RP/province
Target: up to 1 province/3 levels
Duration: Instantaneous
Required Holding: Temple 1
The ability of clerics to heal the sick is widely known, but this spell goes further. With his god’s assistance, the cleric can cure an entire province of a particular plague or disease. The spell cures all common diseases and infections affecting people living within the province. It also puts a halt the spread of magical diseases, including those caused by realm magic, such as death plague, although it does not cure those already infected. This spell can only be cast in a province where the cleric has a temple.
Now I began with the Heal spell, which is level 6, so 4 GB & 4 RP to cast. It is going to effect an entire province, but its effect’s are targets on individuals (in this case plague victims). So those to modifers cancel each other out, so it remains 4 GB & 4 RP to cast. It can effect mutiple provinces, so the cost becomes 2 GB & 2 RP/province. However, I want the spell to have a single GB cost, so using the modified design rules that now becomes 2 GB + (4 RP/province).
Looking at another example, a realm spell called Dominate Province. It is based on the Dominate Monster spell, so it is level 9, or 10 GB and 10 RP to start with. It can effect only 1 province, so that becomes 5 GB, 5 RP. It last for 3 months, so that then becomes 7.5 GB & RP. I want to reduce the GB cost, so that becomes 3.75 GB + 15 RP. It requires a cost per level of province, so that becomes 3.75 GB + 7.5 RP. Rounding up, that then becomes 4 GB + 8 RP/level of province for a spell that allows you to completely dominate a province. If I wanted just a single GB cost, then it would become 4 GB + (16 RP / level of province)
Are these examples balanced? Looking at my original spell note for these two, the costs come out similar. The Cure Plague one is cheaper than the original, the Dominate province one is more expensive, but both are close. In both cases, I went back to the original spell and worked up from there, ending up with results similar to what I had just decided on when originally designing the spells.
Anyway, here is the modified version of the design system, try a few examples and let me know how it turns out. If you think it is worth exploring further, then I shall, otherwise I’ll drop the whole idea and go back to balancing each spell individually.
Creating Realm Spells
Level:
As normal spell
Gold/Regency:
Level 1-2: 1
Level 3-4: 2
Level 5-6: 4
Level 7-8: 8
Level 9: 10
Target Modifiers
Multiple targets: x0.5
Entire Province: x0.5
Holding/Structure: x1.0
Unit: x1.5
Ley Line: x1.5
Individual: x2.0
Target is willing: x0.5
Target is enemy: x2.0
Duration/Effect Modifiers
Instantaneous: x0.5
Less than 1 month: x1.0
1-3 months: x1.5
Longer than 3 months: x2.0
Longer than 6 months: x3.0
Gold Cost Modifiers
Material component < 500 gp x1.0
Material component 500-2000 gp x1.5
Material component > 2000gp x2.0
Reduce Spells Level by 1 x2.0
Regency Cost Modifiers
Reduce Spell’s Level by 1 x2.0
Per level (province/holding): x0.5
Multiple targets, single GB cost* x2.0
Reduce GB cost by 0.5 x2.0
This looks better at first glance, will need some time to test it, my only comment is: if anything like this gets introduced into the published version, man do I hope there is some very good explanatory text! 
Just multipliers, using some rather dense contextual post info from earlier, well…it’s a bit confusing to say to the least. I am glad to see some examples of how to give a striaght base GB cost with stacking RP costs, as most Realm Spells already made seem to follow this example.
As for what to go with…as much as published D&D hates vagueries for fear of the rule-mongers, I think a combination of your listed options seems most prudent. In other words, publish a set of guidelines, and then print in big bold “you can’t miss this” letters
“THIS IS NOT A HARD AND FAST SET OF RULES! THESE ARE GUIDELINES FOR DM’S AND PLAYERS TO BE ABLE TO DESIGN THEIR OWN REALM SPELLS. ANY NEW REALM SPELLS ARE SUBJECT TO DM APPROVAL.”
…and so the rule mongers are squashed, the DM’s retain some freedom to adjust and tweak as they see fit rather than feeling constricted by a system with no flexibility, and the designers get to play with and adjust a system to make it as good as possible within some rather arbitrary guidelines, those being the original 2e realm spell stats, which were somewhat ad hoc and individualized as Raesene mentioned.
That’s my best “make everybody happy” solution…I’m a big fan of creating and encouraging platforms for DM’s to further expand their individual BR campaigns, and any design templates are great for that, so long as they are user-friendly enough (and we may have to see if we can’t make this design template as user-friendly as possible). After all, with no more “official” publications by the original creators, Birthright is now in the hands of its fans…like us. It’s our world now, baby! 
That system definitely needs some major explanatory text before it makes in the BRCS, or any released form At the moment it is about 1/2 a page of info, but it will probably end up being closer to 2 pages in a final version.
I’m going back to designing realm spell for now, although I’ll keep refining this system as I use it to determine the GB and RP costs of new spells.
[b]I am assuming it is the one about different costs for researching spells that are known versus researching new spells. That was how I read your original post that there should be 2 different costs to research a spell, one for the ‘standard’ realm spells (i.e., those to be listed in the BRCS) and one for any new spells researched (new ones or variations of other spells that the character creates.).
This is what I was refering to. There are not 2 separate sets of costs to research a spell in 3.5. There is only one set or formula to be used regardless if it is a spell listed in the BRCS or not. The costing formulas that Ian has been working on and proposing make no distinction between a spell listed in the BRCS, something totally new or creating a variation of an already known spell. [/b]
Yep, because I was comparing a Realm spell not to the regular spell that people would spend time and money to research. I was comparing realm spells to Epic spells. Epic spells require more than just cash to research, they require exp.
However, I was saying that the known spells in the BCRS are spells that are more commonly known (heh, as more common as a realm spell can get, so prob all in the Imperial City) and thus i would agree with the idea that it only requires time and cash to research the known realm spells. While for the character to create a new realm spell it would require them to spend more cash than normal and some exp, as per an epic spell.
Though, as Reasene is using a dif system that is used to define new spells… this point was mostly a moot point. Unless you want to include in the idea that for a character to create a new realm spell that the costs would be higher, instead of just researching a known realm spell from someone elses library or the imperial city wizzie college.
raesene:
I would recomend increasing the modifier for 1year+ to be something like x 4.0 for 1 year and for each additional year.
Originally posted by tcharazazel@Apr 28 2004, 09:00 PM
[b]
Yep, because I was comparing a Realm spell not to the regular spell that people would spend time and money to research. I was comparing realm spells to Epic spells. Epic spells require more than just cash to research, they require exp.
However, I was saying that the known spells in the BCRS are spells that are more commonly known (heh, as more common as a realm spell can get, so prob all in the Imperial City) and thus i would agree with the idea that it only requires time and cash to research the known realm spells. While for the character to create a new realm spell it would require them to spend more cash than normal and some exp, as per an epic spell.
Though, as Reasene is using a dif system that is used to define new spells… this point was mostly a moot point. Unless you want to include in the idea that for a character to create a new realm spell that the costs would be higher, instead of just researching a known realm spell from someone elses library or the imperial city wizzie college. [/b]
Yes, but there is no difference in the learning costs (time, money and/or exp) for any epic spell. They are all treated as individual spells regardless of how common they may be.
That was the point I was making, the 3.5 system makes no distinction in costs (gp, time, exp) for any spell researched regardless of it rarity.
There is no such thing as a ‘common’ realm spell. The bonus from learning them from someone else is a bonus to the check made to learn them. So if learned at the Imperial College a situational modifier would apply.
I didn’t see Ian address how to learn a realm spell only how much they cost (RP/GB wise) (basically this is for casting them as shown in the examples given).
I still think that the system for learning realm spells presented in the BRCS-playtest does a pretty good approximation of the epic spell system in this regard. A new means of limiting the number know by a spell caster and a system for determining costs (and spell level) is a good thing.
I didn’t address the issue of learning new realm spells. Personally I think the current system from the BRCS-playtest is good enough. The only issue I was looking at (and this was only because it was bought up) was a system for determining the RP and GB cost of realm spells.
However, now that you mention it, the time taken to research new realm spell is something that has been bought up a couple of time, especially by people who have used the BRCS rules. My idea on researching spell went something like this…
TIME:
Level 1-3 spells take 1 month to research
Level 4-6 spells take 2 months
Level 7-9 spells take 3 months
(This replaces the 1 month/level system which doesn’t work well as it ties up a wizard’s activities for years to research a single spell. This is even more of a problem in pbem BR games.)
COST:
1 GB/level of spell
(unchanged from original BRCS rules).
SUCCESS:
Spellcraft check (DC = 15 + level of spell). Add a +2 bonus if copying from another wizard’s notes or spellbook. It is not possible to simple copy a realm spell, as the spell is cast using a different method for each caster.
(unchanged).
So the only change I’d propose is to the length of time it takes to research the spell. Although you could add an additional modifier to the DC if the realm spell being researched is a completly new one… perhaps + level of spell again?
I’m in favor of the new research times…I had thought one week per level was proposed before, but I think 1-3 months is even better (as I’ve playtested a week per level, and it seems too easy).
However, I still think Spellcraft DC 15 + 2 per level of the spell is reasonable for a realm spell. I’ve also playtested this, and found it not unreachable for a dedicateed caster…and if you’re not dedicated, what are you doing trying to learn realm spells anyways? Following the epic guidelines, though, what helps is if you let spellcasters use their primary ability modifier for their spellcraft skill (Wis for clerics, Cha for sorcerers), rather than Int for all Spellcraft checks. Then I just tack on a penalty if using Spellcraft for things like a cleric trying to identify a wizard’s spell, for example.
As for number of realm spells known: I think one per caster level is a reasonable limit, then allowing one additional spell known per 5 ranks in the relavent Knowledge skill (Arcana, Religion, or Nature for mages, clerics, and druids resp.).
The issue i was bringin up is that its rather cheap to create a totally new realm spell (in Character) like mass destruction if its based off level 3 spell(s). it would only take 1 month and 3 GB. Heh, for a spell that can rain down and destroy so many units in one casting… its rather cheap.
While researching the spell off of someone else’s realm spellbook(s) or from the wizzie college in the Imperial City it would make sense, I’d say as it would be the charge(s) incurred in finding and paying the owner of the spell to copy it.
However, if they cant find any known copy of the spell, and are thus making it totally from scratch… heh, there would be higher expenses than just 3gb for all the testing, failures, ect until the final sucess. Especially if they plan on the spell including other casters to help them.
Honestly, to make it easier, you could just double the GB cost, add on an equal RP cost, and double the time. So, to create a new level 3 realm spell (in character) it would cost 6GB and 6RP and 2 months, while researching a known spell, like mass destruction, would cost just 3gb and 1 month. Easy to keep track of and follows your system more closely. Essentially the differnece between a known realm spell and an unknown realm spell would be at the DM’s discretion.
The DM could make other spells not inthe BCRS and state these spell are also known and can just be researched. And the DM could also say that some other spells (even some in the BCRS) are not known and would thus need to be created. Heh, could also include adventures to find some parts of those new realm spells even, like special ingredients or an ancient wizzies spellbook or even creating embassies or Diplomacy actions to find some wizard(s) who know the realm spell.
tcharazazel,
The concept of certain spells costing more to research than others of the same level is totally alien to 3.5. That is the point I was making.
Realm spells are all unique and tailored to the individual. No one caster’s version will work for another. Hence there is no such thing as just copying the spell from a spell book. In fact in 3.5 there is no such thing as just copying a spell, a spellcaster has to make a spellcraft check to learn any new spell that he doesn’t gain automatically via leveling up.
This is one of the main features of 3.5 spells. This concept also includes epic spells for that matter.
So introducing something like you are proposing would go against the 3.5 mechanics.
The difference in learning a spell with someone’s aid or from some given source, like a spell book is reflected in the situational bonus applied to the spellcraft check made to learn the spell. For realm spells (like epic ones) the applicable skill used to learn a spell was going to be knowledge (arcana), (religion) or (nature) as applicable.
Now if the issue of learning a spell based off a 3rd level spell being so cheap is what is bothering you, then raising the ‘seed’ spell level is the appropriate thing to do and not changing the method used to learn the spell such that there is more than one mechanic involved.
The primary reason for changing the time it takes to research a spell is to give wizard’s a chance to do something else (like actually cast realm spells :). The GB cost of research alone will prevent them from researching too many, as wizards never have enough gold to do much at all. And if you are still concerned, raise the DC…
One of the main things I’m considering when revising this chapter is to take into consideration the comments everyone made about the chapter. There weren’t many, but the one that did stand out was the research times for realm spells. So that is why it is likely to be changed as I’ve suggested above.
Heheh, I guess you havent figured out why I’m arguing for the higher costs of realm spells… I’m getting it from yall, and the general consistant theme of keeping the BR world a lower magic setting. Its fine with me if its easy to learn these very powerful realm spells, however, to continue calling it a lower magic setting in such a case seems… contradictory.
Realm spells are all unique and tailored to the individual. No one caster’s version will work for another. Hence there is no such thing as just copying the spell from a spell book. In fact in 3.5 there is no such thing as just copying a spell, a spellcaster has to make a spellcraft check to learn any new spell that he doesn’t gain automatically via leveling up.
Point of fact: I had already suggested basing it off the spellcraft DCs as epic spells, earlier.
Heheh, realm spells are unique… right… so we have a listing of them in the BCRS… some how that just doesnt make sense. Especially when considering clerical realm spells who would be likely to keep the realm spells in a sacred text in their main temple and its passed on from Temple Leader to the next Temple Leader. I could agree to wizards having to write totally new realm spells every time… though with an imperial wizard college inthe imperial city… heh, so they actually dont offer standardized spells? what kind of college are they? would prob just have to ignore them then…
The primary reason for changing the time it takes to research a spell is to give wizard’s a chance to do something else (like actually cast realm spells . The GB cost of research alone will prevent them from researching too many, as wizards never have enough gold to do much at all. And if you are still concerned, raise the DC…
Heheh, well i wasnt proposing the change for learning those realm spells that were in the BCRS, just those that weren’t known. And really only level 1 realm spells would require more time than the BCRS version of having it take 1 month/level.
If youre basing the realm spell system only on wizards (and I know you’re not) then you have to consider how much easier it is for the clerics… It looses its sense of balance in that regard if you bring it down to the LCD (lowest common denominator, namely the wizards) instead of an average of the classes that would use/benefit from the changes.
Heheh, wizards should be used to putting off rewards anyway
Heheh, I guess you havent figured out why I’m arguing for the higher costs of realm spells… I’m getting it from yall, and the general consistant theme of keeping the BR world a lower magic setting. Its fine with me if its easy to learn these very powerful realm spells, however, to continue calling it a lower magic setting in such a case seems… contradictory.
Given that there are very few regent wizards in Cerilia, making realm spells quicker to learn does effect the low magic setting. I don’t have my books with me, so I can’t give you a fully accurate number of regent wizards and clerics, but it isn’t a huge number (probably 15 or 20 wizards in Anuire). And I think by low magic everyone means no magic shops selling premade magical items, no wizard in every town and maybe only a magician in the larger towns.
Heheh, realm spells are unique… right… so we have a listing of them in the BCRS… some how that just doesnt make sense. Especially when considering clerical realm spells who would be likely to keep the realm spells in a sacred text in their main temple and its passed on from Temple Leader to the next Temple Leader. I could agree to wizards having to write totally new realm spells every time… though with an imperial wizard college inthe imperial city… heh, so they actually dont offer standardized spells? what kind of college are they? would prob just have to ignore them then…
A college without any source holdings, thus no realm spells. Anyway, the college of sorcery isn’t going to teach realm spells to its students… well for obvious reasons that I don’t think I need to spell out.
As for realm spells being unique, they can have the same effects and still be unique. In fact, I would think that most spells are cast differently for each wizard.
So, the college has lost all of its power and books ect from when it was in the empire? For although the College itself doesnt hold any source holdings those who ran it in the past certainly did and if the circle is still around it stil will.
Besides, currently the system doesnt require any source holdings to research realm spells, so why couldnt they have all of them? You’d think that over time they would have collected them all really and standardized them, into the ones we’re currently using in the BCRS. True you can make variants to them to make them “unique,” however, they would hav the same effect and its not like you’re coming up with something totally new that nobody has tried to make before.
Heheh, or are those spells ect only available to those higher up in the college? Like those wizards who are worthy of actually researching such spells? Like regent wizards?
Wizards aside though, what about the clerics? Would they keep such tomes of powerful realm spells and pass them along to their predecesor? Or do they not trust their predecesor with such knowledge? I could understand that some dont pass along the knowledge, like clerics of Krieisha, though most of them would.
The college of sorcery was wiped off the face of Cerilia shortly after the death of Michael Roele and the collapse of the Anuirean Empire. The modern college is housed in what was an old barracks building, while the old college is a still smouldering ruin next door. Most of the old knowledge, magic, and indeed the source holding itself lies somewhere in the dungeons beneath the ruins…
I think you would need to control a source or temple before you were able to research realm spells, that is only logical. I think I’ve made mention of needing to be a regent before (and can only be a regent if you control a holding), but I can change the info to better explain that. It doesn’t make sense that you could research a realm spell that requires a source or temple to cast without actually controlling a source or temple to cast it with. To use a RW example, it would be like trying to determine how two chemicals will react without having any of the chemicals to actually test your theories…
And by unique, I mean the way they are cast, rather than the effects of spell, or even the spell itself. For example, one wizard might cast his realm spells by carving runes, another by slaughtering small furry animals, another by burning incense, and so on. The way each wizard casts the spell is unique to that particular wizard…
As for Clerics, well I can see you point. However, learning a ritual used to cast a realm spell would still take time. There is perhaps a case for reducing the cost of learning clerical realm spells. In the original 2E rules, clerics automatically learned the standard realm spells, only wizards had to research their spells… I don’t know how this tallies with 3.5E rules for learning clerical spells.