Questions & Answers

Okay everyone... We've been playing as a group for awhile now. I figured we should have some Q&A on 2E stuff. My first question is languages... Especially those gained from INT. I know we use the "You know" your base tongue rule. But how do we handle bonus languages? Especially when it concerns speak, reading, and writing... Do each require a NWP? Does being literate help you learn them automatically? Or can you apply your bonus languages to those? I checked various sources and they're all semi-nebulous.

In our campaign -- You get 1 starting language (speaking) for free. All other Language (Speaking), plus Language (Reading/Writing) are obtained thru NWP. You do get the INT stat mod "Number Of Langs" as a bonus on your NWP slots. We also give additional bonus NWP slots compared to 2E by-the-book. The formula is 3 NWP base + Level (gaining 1 NWP per level including 1st level) + Your INT "# Langs" mod. Speaking a Lang costs 1 NWP slot for everyone, except your first Lang is free.  Reading/Writing a Lang I think costs less for maybe Wizards and Clerics (2 NWP slots per Lang to Read?), or whatever, I think it costs an extra NWP slot for Warrior types (3 points per lang to read?). Rogues can put Thief Skill points into Read Languages ability, and have a % chance of reading and de-coding unfamiliar writings. It is semi-nebulous in rules sources, I modified this for our homebrew campaign, with our modifications generally leading to more Player flexibility and more NWP slots (since you can spend NWP on Languages or on something else, your choice, whatever fits the type of PC that you want to portray). Additional questions are welcome!

That's good to know. I always assumed it was 1 NWP. So to Speak/Read/Write = 3 NWP in total. In my case I got to pick which one wanted. Another question... What's our stance on Spell Reversals? For example turning: Cure Light Wounds into Cause Light Wounds or Heal into Harm. I would assume the Spell would first have to be able to be reversed. Second would that be "locked" by your character alignment?

i mean, why would it be? if a Good priest can bash a skull with a hammer, why not cast a spell that hurts as well? i mean, it seems like a waste of a good heal spell, but i dont see why ONLY an evil cleric could reverse it.... just my thoughts lol... just have to keep in mind, its not so much the SPELL that is evil, but the intentions behind its use

Paul W. said: i mean, why would it be? if a Good priest can bash a skull with a hammer, why not cast a spell that hurts as well? i mean, it seems like a waste of a good heal spell, but i dont see why ONLY an evil cleric could reverse it.... just my thoughts lol... just have to keep in mind, its not so much the SPELL that is evil, but the intentions behind its use Well in terms of my game, I have no problem with clerics casting cause wounds on people, unless thier God would object and even then they could try and see what the God in question does. I think if the act was to save somone or fight evil then a good cleric should be able to cast a wound spell.

lex said: Well in terms of my game, I have no problem with clerics casting cause wounds on people, unless thier God would object and even then they could try and see what the God in question does. I think if the act was to save someone or fight evil then a good cleric should be able to cast a wound spell. Well my new PC is basically a Lawful Neutral Death priest... I've read several discussions online concerning Necromancy; which he has a major domain in. Some say its all evil. Others say it depends on "intent" and "need". I agree with this 2nd opinion. However the books state certain things are wholly evil... Some of the spells ARE but others depend on the player's agency.  Kelemvor hates the undead. But its another gray area concerning raising them. Some say its okay if the depart's spirits are "asked" to lend their shells vs taking them. Either way I don't see my PC doing it wantonly... But I do see him using a spell like Ebony Hand (stated to be EVIL) to enpower wounding spells. 

SolidHybrid said: lex said: Well in terms of my game, I have no problem with clerics casting cause wounds on people, unless thier God would object and even then they could try and see what the God in question does. I think if the act was to save someone or fight evil then a good cleric should be able to cast a wound spell. Well my new PC is basically a Lawful Neutral Death priest... I've read several discussions online concerning Necromancy; which he has a major domain in. Some say its all evil. Others say it depends on "intent" and "need". I agree with this 2nd opinion. However the books state certain things are wholly evil... Some of the spells ARE but others depend on the player's agency.  Kelemvor hates the undead. But its another gray area concerning raising them. Some say its okay if the depart's spirits are "asked" to lend their shells vs taking them. Either way I don't see my PC doing it wantonly... But I do see him using a spell like Ebony Hand (stated to be EVIL) to enpower wounding spells.  Yup for me its all about intent, walking that line between researching and knowing a thing and becoming it. Falling to darkness is always a risk.

So yeah I just read the entire Heat Metal spell... HOLY SHIT that's nasty. For a level 2 spell it last SEVEN rounds! 1st: Warm 2nd: 1d4 3rd: 2d4 4th: 2d4 5th: 2d4 6th: 1d4 7th: Warm - But Creature must roll Saving vs Spell or suffer a disability! This is all on top of any burning damage caused by ignited leather,cloth, or wooden materials.