Three major points of confusion for new players

So something I've noticed while GM'ing with the packet, which I've been using with new players, is that there are still three major points of confusion for new players.

1: Abilities scores (as opposed to just modifiers) are uncessesary as they don't affect enough and just confuse players.  It would be so much easier for what's currently modifiers to JUST BE your ability thingy.  The system as a whole would benefit greatly if instead of referring to your "Strength modifier" every single time, it simply referred to your "Strength".

2:  Spell preparation and slots seem to be incredibly confusing for a lot of my players.  I'm personally fine with it.

3. Hit dice are confusing, although I love how they work.  It needs to be presented better, not just assume that all players have had years of experience with previous systems.  This may just be an issue with the playtest not being fully fledged at the moment.

inb4 thats how it is because thats how its always been.  You're not adding anything to the conversation.
1. It's very simple, you just create your scores (higher is better) and look up the bonus on a table. The scores, however, are needed. In order to help differentiate races and classes, as well as provide advancement over levels, you need to something that increases more slowly than the bonus. If you got +1 to a bonus from race, +1 to a bonus from class, and +1 to a bonus every 4 levels, that would be too much. It needs a lower rate of increase.

2. Spells are also relatively easy to understand. At the start of the day, you choose [1+level] spells. Then you can use them using your spell slots over the day.

3.  Hit dice aren't confusing. You have X dice per day, and you can use them after a 10 minute rest to heal. How is that not easy to understand?

I'm sorry to say it, but if your players are confused, I don't think it's the game's fault. My local players and I (many of them brand new to roleplaying, I ran the "first time ever" games at my local hobby shop for a while) haven't had a single problem with understanding the rules, though we've taken issue with the implementation of some of them. You might want to try them on an ultra-lite game, like Risus or something akin to that. Next is really verys imple as far as RPG's go.
My experience with the spell system has been:
Me: [description of what the rules say]
Player: [blank stare]
Me: All spellcasters are like 3.x sorcerers, except you can pick a new list of spells you know each day
Player: [dawning comprehension]

Perhaps it's just that a lot of players will start from the point of assuming that cleric/wizard spellcasting works like it did in 2e/3e, but this system does seem to require a bit of a leap for some players to grasp how it's supposed to work. 

I would be curious to see how well a player who was completely new to D&D would do, going straight from the rules to play without any guidance, whether it would be easier because they didn't have any preconceptions.

My players are completely new to D&D. We don`t have any spellcasters in the party, except my character who only has 2 cantrips 1 of which is useless (Mystical Healer, previous playtest packet), and so far everything has been OK in regards to comprehending the system.


On the other hand, there is a lot of questions like "Can we do ANYTHING in combat beside attacking with a weapon?" When facing 15 rats we got creative and destroyed them / forced them to run away in a couple of rounds, but with humanoid foes the system doesn`t offer anything interesting.

On the other hand, there is a lot of questions like "Can we do ANYTHING in combat beside attacking with a weapon?" When facing 15 rats we got creative and destroyed them / forced them to run away in a couple of rounds, but with humanoid foes the system doesn`t offer anything interesting.

There's pleny of interesting and creative things you can do against other humanoids. But if you have a wide-open, empty field for every combat, that won't really help. The problem is that people are so used to games that tell you every little thing you can do (and imply that you can't do anything else), that they find it difficult to improvise in a more open system.

Swing from chandeliers (Dexterity). Throw barrels of grog into approaching hordes (Strength) then light them on fire. Pull their cloak over their eyes (Dex. vs. Dex.) Push over Bookshelves (Strength). Trick one guy into hitting another (Intelligence/Charisma vs. Wisdom).

The point is to just tell your DM what sort of trick or stunt you want to pull. Then all your DM has to do is decide which ability score fits best, and whether it should be opposed (vs. the target's most applicable ability score), easy to pull off (DC 10), or hard to pull off (DC 15).
I don't mean to be rude, but I've not come across a single player who had troublke with points 1-2 and the only reason any one has had an issue with point 3 (Hit Dice) is do to previous meanings for that term.

In some respects mechanics which force the player to exercise a small portion of their brain are usefull unto themselves, if we simplify everything to the point of pre school it would quickly grow boring both do to disconnect and lack of creative options in play (Such as lowering someone's Strength to the point of weekness or combining/expending spell slots).
On the other hand, there is a lot of questions like "Can we do ANYTHING in combat beside attacking with a weapon?" When facing 15 rats we got creative and destroyed them / forced them to run away in a couple of rounds, but with humanoid foes the system doesn`t offer anything interesting.

There's pleny of interesting and creative things you can do against other humanoids. But if you have a wide-open, empty field for every combat, that won't really help. The problem is that people are so used to games that tell you every little thing you can do (and imply that you can't do anything else), that they find it difficult to improvise in a more open system.

Swing from chandeliers (Dexterity). Throw barrels of grog into approaching hordes (Strength) then light them on fire. Pull their cloak over their eyes (Dex. vs. Dex.) Push over Bookshelves (Strength). Trick one guy into hitting another (Intelligence/Charisma vs. Wisdom).

The point is to just tell your DM what sort of trick or stunt you want to pull. Then all your DM has to do is decide which ability score fits best, and whether it should be opposed (vs. the target's most applicable ability score), easy to pull off (DC 10), or hard to pull off (DC 15).


The rat problem is that while a player can try to do things outside the specific rules like swing from chandeliers, throw barrels, etc, if they say "Can I flail my sword wildly to try to kill several of these little sods trying to bite my legs in one go?" then the answer is no, unless they've got the exact feat that allows it (Wide Arc or whatever). As it stands under the current rules, if they're not a wizard they have to stab at each individual rat one by one, which is utterly tedious. 
The rat problem is that while a player can try to do things outside the specific rules like swing from chandeliers, throw barrels, etc, if they say "Can I flail my sword wildly to try to kill several of these little sods trying to bite my legs in one go?" then the answer is no, unless they've got the exact feat that allows it (Wide Arc or whatever). As it stands under the current rules, if they're not a wizard they have to stab at each individual rat one by one, which is utterly tedious. 

Well of course "flailing your sword around" at a bunch of rats won't help much. And stabbing them to death one at a time should be tedious (and dangerous)... that's the point of a large swarm of rats, is that it's not a conventional enemy, and has its own quirks and strategies.

Sword flailing won't help. Tipping a barrel of oil on them and then tossing the torch down, however, will work wonders. Use some flasks of oil if you don't have a barrel handy. Or you can still use one of the many other suggestions; a large bookcase knocked over on some rats would probably make a bit of a dent in their numbers. Or even just flipping a table over on them; large surface area + armored fighter jumping up and down = squished-up rats.

I like that people will be expected to think of their own strategies again, instead of just referring to their character sheet to see which power covers the largest area. Improvisation is a wonderful thing, and the Next system so far has made huge strides in making it easier with the way they handle skill/ability checks and saves.
1. It's very simple, you just create your scores (higher is better) and look up the bonus on a table. The scores, however, are needed. In order to help differentiate races and classes, as well as provide advancement over levels, you need to something that increases more slowly than the bonus. If you got +1 to a bonus from race, +1 to a bonus from class, and +1 to a bonus every 4 levels, that would be too much. It needs a lower rate of increase.

2. Spells are also relatively easy to understand. At the start of the day, you choose [1+level] spells. Then you can use them using your spell slots over the day.

3.  Hit dice aren't confusing. You have X dice per day, and you can use them after a 10 minute rest to heal. How is that not easy to understand?

I'm sorry to say it, but if your players are confused, I don't think it's the game's fault. My local players and I (many of them brand new to roleplaying, I ran the "first time ever" games at my local hobby shop for a while) haven't had a single problem with understanding the rules, though we've taken issue with the implementation of some of them. You might want to try them on an ultra-lite game, like Risus or something akin to that. Next is really verys imple as far as RPG's go.



I don't think the OP was saying he was confused and needed an explanation; he was saying that players are confused by it.  The abilities one surprised me; but then again I played AD&D 30 years ago so am used to the idea.  The other two (spell preparation and hit dice) I can totally understand: had to read both of those several times before the "aha!" moment.  But, then again, maybe it's because both of those use terminology similar to original D&D but with slight modifications.
"Therefore, you are the crapper, I'm merely the vessel through which you crap." -- akaddk

I like that people will be expected to think of their own strategies again, instead of just referring to their character sheet to see which power covers the largest area.



So I take it you want the entire magic system changed, yes? Because the spell system in NEXT is "referring to [your] character sheet to see which power" instantly solves whatever problem you encounter. And not just referring to your character sheet. Referring to the 1/3 of the book that lists all the spells and exactly what they do.

If we are going to force everyone to improvise, the casters should not be exempt.

Improvisation is a wonderful thing, and the Next system so far has made huge strides in making it easier with the way they handle skill/ability checks and saves.



Improvisation is great, but let's face the facts. Let's say I'm playing a Fighter in NEXT. I am a TRAINED WARRIOR. I am an EXPERIENCED COMBATANT. You should not tell me that a professional weapon fighter should not rely on their weapon fighting. You should not tel me that the only way for me to be effective is to swing from %$&# and drop anvils on people from balconys and roll barrels at things like I'm Donkey Kong. The features granted by my class should allow me to emulate being a powerful weapon fighter. I should have the OPTION to improvise, just as every character is free to improvise, including the spellcasters who many have no issue giving very set abilities to. I should not be REQUIRED to improvise to be allowed to do anything interesting or effective.
EVERY DAY IS HORRIBLE POST DAY ON THE D&D FORUMS. Everything makes me ANGRY (ESPECIALLY you, reader)
1:  This is a relic from 1974.  Nothing really changes (much) if you tell your players to just use the mods.

2:  Also a relic from 1974.  There's a strong suggestion we may get several drop-in spell systems.  If we don't just use Sorcerer system from playtest 3 for everyone.
If you can't get PT3, here's a rundown:
Convert the Spells-per-level table to Points using a simple points=spell-level*slots.  Each spell costs an amount  of points equal to its spell-level.

3: Explain this as a pool of dice your players can spend between fights to get some hitpoints back.  That's pretty much what it is.
On the other hand, there is a lot of questions like "Can we do ANYTHING in combat beside attacking with a weapon?" When facing 15 rats we got creative and destroyed them / forced them to run away in a couple of rounds, but with humanoid foes the system doesn`t offer anything interesting.

There's pleny of interesting and creative things you can do against other humanoids. But if you have a wide-open, empty field for every combat, that won't really help. The problem is that people are so used to games that tell you every little thing you can do (and imply that you can't do anything else), that they find it difficult to improvise in a more open system.

Swing from chandeliers (Dexterity). Throw barrels of grog into approaching hordes (Strength) then light them on fire. Pull their cloak over their eyes (Dex. vs. Dex.) Push over Bookshelves (Strength). Trick one guy into hitting another (Intelligence/Charisma vs. Wisdom).

The point is to just tell your DM what sort of trick or stunt you want to pull. Then all your DM has to do is decide which ability score fits best, and whether it should be opposed (vs. the target's most applicable ability score), easy to pull off (DC 10), or hard to pull off (DC 15).


The rat problem is that while a player can try to do things outside the specific rules like swing from chandeliers, throw barrels, etc, if they say "Can I flail my sword wildly to try to kill several of these little sods trying to bite my legs in one go?" then the answer is no, unless they've got the exact feat that allows it (Wide Arc or whatever). As it stands under the current rules, if they're not a wizard they have to stab at each individual rat one by one, which is utterly tedious.
As it stands under the current rules, if they're not a wizard they have to stab at each individual rat one by one, which is utterly tedious.

Have you ever fought a group of rats? They can be surprisingly squirrely.

The metagame is not the game.

They can be surprisingly squirrely.

Have you ever fought a group of squirrels?

To be honest, "Hit Dice" are confusing for two reasons.

First, for anyone familiar with previous editions it means the dice you roll for hit points at each level, and for monsters might be a level equivalent. Let's not go into slightly more obscure meanings of the term.

Second, it's used in the first sense even in the playtest itself. Go check the "Spells" section, and see for yourself the context in which "Hit Die" or "Hit Dice" appear - as well as in the "How to Play" document.

Now it is both the number you roll for your hit points total and a mechanic similar to 4E healing surges.

I like that people will be expected to think of their own strategies again, instead of just referring to their character sheet to see which power covers the largest area.



So I take it you want the entire magic system changed, yes? Because the spell system in NEXT is "referring to [your] character sheet to see which power" instantly solves whatever problem you encounter. And not just referring to your character sheet. Referring to the 1/3 of the book that lists all the spells and exactly what they do.

If we are going to force everyone to improvise, the casters should not be exempt.

Improvisation is a wonderful thing, and the Next system so far has made huge strides in making it easier with the way they handle skill/ability checks and saves.



Improvisation is great, but let's face the facts. Let's say I'm playing a Fighter in NEXT. I am a TRAINED WARRIOR. I am an EXPERIENCED COMBATANT. You should not tell me that a professional weapon fighter should not rely on their weapon fighting. You should not tel me that the only way for me to be effective is to swing from %$&# and drop anvils on people from balconys and roll barrels at things like I'm Donkey Kong. The features granted by my class should allow me to emulate being a powerful weapon fighter. I should have the OPTION to improvise, just as every character is free to improvise, including the spellcasters who many have no issue giving very set abilities to. I should not be REQUIRED to improvise to be allowed to do anything interesting or effective.

Maybe "Cleave" should be modified so that instead of just "once per turn" it's "up to a number of times equal to your Strength bonus."
"Therefore, you are the crapper, I'm merely the vessel through which you crap." -- akaddk
I find it rather funny that the only people confused by hit dice aren't actually new players.

If you have the same people getting confused by points 1 and 3, something strange is going on.

If you're unsatisfied with having to kill each individual rat in a swarm, have you considered running them as a swarm instead of a plethora of individuals?

I like that people will be expected to think of their own strategies again, instead of just referring to their character sheet to see which power covers the largest area.



So I take it you want the entire magic system changed, yes? Because the spell system in NEXT is "referring to [your] character sheet to see which power" instantly solves whatever problem you encounter. And not just referring to your character sheet. Referring to the 1/3 of the book that lists all the spells and exactly what they do.

If we are going to force everyone to improvise, the casters should not be exempt.

Improvisation is a wonderful thing, and the Next system so far has made huge strides in making it easier with the way they handle skill/ability checks and saves.



Improvisation is great, but let's face the facts. Let's say I'm playing a Fighter in NEXT. I am a TRAINED WARRIOR. I am an EXPERIENCED COMBATANT. You should not tell me that a professional weapon fighter should not rely on their weapon fighting. You should not tel me that the only way for me to be effective is to swing from %$&# and drop anvils on people from balconys and roll barrels at things like I'm Donkey Kong. The features granted by my class should allow me to emulate being a powerful weapon fighter. I should have the OPTION to improvise, just as every character is free to improvise, including the spellcasters who many have no issue giving very set abilities to. I should not be REQUIRED to improvise to be allowed to do anything interesting or effective.




Yep. Improvisational magic would really be a great Next step forward.
Fighter: looks at character sheet "Why can't I do anything cool"

DM: "You can do anything, that is the beuity, just make up an action and I will rule what you have to roll to do it."

Fighter: "Um,  ok, then lets start"


DM: "You are in the city of Leinshire, and you are amazed at the large stone wall that is inbetween two mountins to the north, it holds back the entire northern Ocean, allowing this whole area to live in this valley"


Some time passes, game goes on, the group gets into a fight with a necromacer who has an army of thousands of undead.


DM: "By his black hand the DEAD WILL RISE" Dm looks around "And with that all of the dead soldiers and towns folk rise up as undead as well... as long as he maintians concetration all dead bodies for miles will continue to rise, but you have to cut through his forcs to get to him."


Fighter: "UM, how far is that damn again from the town?"

DM: "Only a few hundred yards why?"


FIghter: "Well I run to the wall, and take my legendary strength and punch a hole in it, flooding the town"


DM: "Um think this through you will flood the valley and die"


Fighter; "Oh I did think it through, I will once the water gets going I am going to punch the mountins causeing a rock slide, and re damning the river."


DM: :0 "No, just no... what a stupid idea"


FIghter: "Come on it is like herculese or heman, and it is perfectly in line with the power level we have"


DM: "NO, not happening, none of it"


Cleric: "Ok, then I cast stone shape, and open a round hole but reinforce around it raiseing the river and flooding the city"

DM: "Oh ok, but how will you seal it"


Cleric: "Um stone shape?"

DM: "Ok"


Fighter: "Wait that is the same thing I wanted to do but with my legendary str instead of a spell, why can he do it and not me?"


DM: "dude, he is useing magic"



and that is why it is not fair that some people get lists of 'cool I can do X' and others get told 'be creative'


by the way that was more or less really a 3e game I played in.


                                                   

Before posting, ask yourself WWWS: What Would Wrecan Say?

I'd let you punch a hole in the wall. Strength check, DC 20. If you fail, you take X damage but you can try over and over until it works (while the undead hordes are mounting). Good/funny roleplay might give you advantage.
Fighter: looks at character sheet "Why can't I do anything cool"

DM: "You can do anything, that is the beuity, just make up an action and I will rule what you have to roll to do it."

Fighter: "Um,  ok, then lets start"


DM: "You are in the city of Leinshire, and you are amazed at the large stone wall that is inbetween two mountins to the north, it holds back the entire northern Ocean, allowing this whole area to live in this valley"


Some time passes, game goes on, the group gets into a fight with a necromacer who has an army of thousands of undead.


DM: "By his black hand the DEAD WILL RISE" Dm looks around "And with that all of the dead soldiers and towns folk rise up as undead as well... as long as he maintians concetration all dead bodies for miles will continue to rise, but you have to cut through his forcs to get to him."


Fighter: "UM, how far is that damn again from the town?"

DM: "Only a few hundred yards why?"


FIghter: "Well I run to the wall, and take my legendary strength and punch a hole in it, flooding the town"


DM: "Um think this through you will flood the valley and die"


Fighter; "Oh I did think it through, I will once the water gets going I am going to punch the mountins causeing a rock slide, and re damning the river."


DM: :0 "No, just no... what a stupid idea"


FIghter: "Come on it is like herculese or heman, and it is perfectly in line with the power level we have"


DM: "NO, not happening, none of it"


Cleric: "Ok, then I cast stone shape, and open a round hole but reinforce around it raiseing the river and flooding the city"

DM: "Oh ok, but how will you seal it"


Cleric: "Um stone shape?"

DM: "Ok"


Fighter: "Wait that is the same thing I wanted to do but with my legendary str instead of a spell, why can he do it and not me?"


DM: "dude, he is useing magic"



and that is why it is not fair that some people get lists of 'cool I can do X' and others get told 'be creative'


by the way that was more or less really a 3e game I played in.


                                                   





Scary that people can't figure out what to do if it is not on their character sheets.  Sometimes it helps to read the chapter on combat.  All kinds of maneuvers can be done in BECMI thru 3.x by reading the chapters on combat.  And not one feat to put on your character sheet was needed.  And the fighter did them better than anyone.
They can be surprisingly squirrely.

Have you ever fought a group of squirrels?



I did once, but they were really ratty.

"Therefore, you are the crapper, I'm merely the vessel through which you crap." -- akaddk
Fighter: looks at character sheet "Why can't I do anything cool"

DM: "You can do anything, that is the beuity, just make up an action and I will rule what you have to roll to do it."

Fighter: "Um,  ok, then lets start"

DM: "You are in the city of Leinshire, and you are amazed at the large stone wall that is inbetween two mountins to the north, it holds back the entire northern Ocean, allowing this whole area to live in this valley"

Some time passes, game goes on, the group gets into a fight with a necromacer who has an army of thousands of undead.

DM: "By his black hand the DEAD WILL RISE" Dm looks around "And with that all of the dead soldiers and towns folk rise up as undead as well... as long as he maintians concetration all dead bodies for miles will continue to rise, but you have to cut through his forcs to get to him."

Fighter: "UM, how far is that damn again from the town?"

DM: "Only a few hundred yards why?"

FIghter: "Well I run to the wall, and take my legendary strength and punch a hole in it, flooding the town"

DM: "Um think this through you will flood the valley and die"

Fighter; "Oh I did think it through, I will once the water gets going I am going to punch the mountins causeing a rock slide, and re damning the river."

DM: :0 "No, just no... what a stupid idea"

FIghter: "Come on it is like herculese or heman, and it is perfectly in line with the power level we have"

DM: "NO, not happening, none of it"

Cleric: "Ok, then I cast stone shape, and open a round hole but reinforce around it raiseing the river and flooding the city"

DM: "Oh ok, but how will you seal it"

Cleric: "Um stone shape?"

DM: "Ok"

Fighter: "Wait that is the same thing I wanted to do but with my legendary str instead of a spell, why can he do it and not me?"

DM: "dude, he is useing magic"

and that is why it is not fair that some people get lists of 'cool I can do X' and others get told 'be creative'

by the way that was more or less really a 3e game I played in.


This a hundred times over. One of the big problems of the 3E/2E* games I've played is that the rules and mechancis don't back up the archetypes that the classes seem to be made to fulfill.

If they would really fix that in Next, it would be a big reason for me to switch.

*) I've played a little of 4E and 1E, but not enough to make general statements like this.

5e should strongly stay away from "I don't like it, so you can't have it either."

 

I once asked the question (in D&D 3.5) "Does a Druid4/Wizard3/ArcaneHierophant1 have Wildshape?". Jesse Decker and Andy Collins: Yes and the text is clear and can't be interpreted differently. Rich Redman and Ed Stark: No and the text is clear and can't be interpreted differently. Skip Williams: Lol, it's worded ambiguously and entirely not how I intended it. (Cust. Serv. Reference# 050815-000323)

My experience with the spell system has been:
Me: [description of what the rules say]
Player: [blank stare]
Me: All spellcasters are like 3.x sorcerers, except you can pick a new list of spells you know each day
Player: [dawning comprehension]

Perhaps it's just that a lot of players will start from the point of assuming that cleric/wizard spellcasting works like it did in 2e/3e, but this system does seem to require a bit of a leap for some players to grasp how it's supposed to work. 

I would be curious to see how well a player who was completely new to D&D would do, going straight from the rules to play without any guidance, whether it would be easier because they didn't have any preconceptions.



We've actually been wondering about this.  I assumed the wizard had a set list of spells that he added to every level, while the cleric had a set number of spells that he could swap out for new spells every morning (thus allowing him to use higher-level spells once those slots open up).  Are you saying the wizard has the same option of completely swapping out all his spells each day?  (We never played 2e/3e so those references don't mean much)

Apr 4, 2013 -- 10:26AM, bgibbons wrote:

My experience with the spell system has been:
Me: [description of what the rules say]
Player: [blank stare]
Me: All spellcasters are like 3.x sorcerers, except you can pick a new list of spells you know each day
Player: [dawning comprehension]

Perhaps it's just that a lot of players will start from the point of assuming that cleric/wizard spellcasting works like it did in 2e/3e, but this system does seem to require a bit of a leap for some players to grasp how it's supposed to work. 

I would be curious to see how well a player who was completely new to D&D would do, going straight from the rules to play without any guidance, whether it would be easier because they didn't have any preconceptions.




We've actually been wondering about this.  I assumed the wizard had a set list of spells that he added to every level, while the cleric had a set number of spells that he could swap out for new spells every morning (thus allowing him to use higher-level spells once those slots open up).  Are you saying the wizard has the same option of completely swapping out all his spells each day?  (We never played 2e/3e so those references don't mean much)


Nope - The Wizard starts with 3 1st lvl spells in his spellbook, clearly stated in the Spellbook section on p.46 in Classes.pdf.
On top of these, he ofc also knows the cantrips he's picked from other class choices.

Each day he chooses to prepare 1 + Wizard lvl spells total, from the spells in the spell book.

The wizard can then choose to cast spells choosing from the prepared spells, expending spell slots as needed or choosing higher lvl spell slots than needed for extra effect, as detailed under each spell.

So.. Each spell in the wizard spell list should have 2 boxes to tick : Prepared & Known.

Incidentally, I have made just such a list : docs.google.com/file/d/0B1h93rzjdElVX3FF...

Apr 4, 2013 -- 10:26AM, bgibbons wrote:


My experience with the spell system has been:
Me: [description of what the rules say]
Player: [blank stare]
Me: All spellcasters are like 3.x sorcerers, except you can pick a new list of spells you know each day
Player: [dawning comprehension]

Perhaps it's just that a lot of players will start from the point of assuming that cleric/wizard spellcasting works like it did in 2e/3e, but this system does seem to require a bit of a leap for some players to grasp how it's supposed to work. 

I would be curious to see how well a player who was completely new to D&D would do, going straight from the rules to play without any guidance, whether it would be easier because they didn't have any preconceptions.



We've actually been wondering about this.  I assumed the wizard had a set list of spells that he added to every level, while the cleric had a set number of spells that he could swap out for new spells every morning (thus allowing him to use higher-level spells once those slots open up).  Are you saying the wizard has the same option of completely swapping out all his spells each day?  (We never played 2e/3e so those references don't mean much)


Nope - The Wizard starts with 3 1st lvl spells in his spellbook, clearly stated in the Spellbook section on p.46 in Classes.pdf. On top of these, he ofc also knows the cantrips he's picked from other class choices. Each day he chooses to prepare 1 + Wizard lvl spells total, from the spells in the spell book. The wizard can then choose to cast spells choosing from the prepared spells, expending spell slots as needed or choosing higher lvl spell slots than needed for extra effect, as detailed under each spell. So.. Each spell in the wizard spell list should have 2 boxes to tick : Prepared & Known. Incidentally, I have made just such a list : docs.google.com/file/d/0B1h93rzjdElVX3FF...



Yeah so basically the way we've been doing it is correct then.  Good to know.  Thanks.

Also, that list you made looks very useful!  Probably even deserves it's own thread, if you haven't made one for it already.
Incidentally, I have made just such a list : docs.google.com/file/d/0B1h93rzjdElVX3FF...



Thank you. This is exactly what i need for my games, and the font is really nice too!

Chauntea/Lathander/Torm Cleric since 1995 My husband married a DM - καλὸς καὶ ἀγαθός

IMAGE(http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/14.jpg)


Apr 13, 2013 -- 12:37PM, Ashardis wrote:

Incidentally, I have made just such a list : docs.google.com/file/d/0B1h93rzjdElVX3FF...




Thank you. This is exactly what i need for my games, and the font is really nice too!



Well, you should take a look at the charsheet I made aswell : community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...
Well, you should take a look at the charsheet I made aswell : community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...



!!! Woah! Thank you! Really thank you!

Chauntea/Lathander/Torm Cleric since 1995 My husband married a DM - καλὸς καὶ ἀγαθός

IMAGE(http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/14.jpg)