Spellbound Table Organization

[Crafty_Pat]

Since it's come up, other than School and Discipline, what table organizations are people looking for in Spellbound?

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

The "by level" one was very useful in the core book.

[Sletchman]

Seconds before you posted this I posted my thoughts in the FAQ thread [in response to the general discussion].
Reposted so so you guys can find it all in one spot:

The one thing I currently think was done better in That Other Roleplaying Game [or perhaps that other, other roleplaying game, because I'm not referring to TORG] is their spell listing at the start of the spells chapter.  If it was done like this, I'd a happy guy.  I vastly prefer it to the charts that are in the two existing spellbound products, as well as the one in FantasyCraft.

Once my holidays kick in, along side my epic post apocolyptic mastercraft setting I'm writing, I plan on writing a list in that style for Fantasy Craft's existing spell list.

I will add for clarity that I mean a list breaking down by Level, then Discipline, then Alphabetically by Spell, with brief description.  It'll be slightly more space consuming then a chart will be, so I can't speculate if this would work.

Due to the vast number of spells you could also make it 8 smaller lists, depending on how the spell list chapter is laid out.  Have "The Trickster" then have a list of all 111 spells, listed by level and discipline, with the descriptions, and then have full rules for each spell following.  You could make them sub chapters for ease of naviation.

[Dhampire]

I would like to see one of the following lists:

School: Discipline: Level: Spell Name

Level: School: Discipline: Spell Name

Grouping by School, I understand, may be a bit confusing for some, and I could derive that if one of the above existed without it.

The second list does emulate that other game, but it works for me.  A list by level without sorting by discipline in some way... isn't the best for those who have Specialist mages.

[Sletchman]

The second list does emulate that other game, but it works for me.  A list by level without sorting by discipline in some way... isn't the best for those who have Specialist mages.

Or those who play in campaigns with Lost Magic or any upcoming campaign qualities that affect specific schools / disciplines.

[EloiseCartwright]

Rather than do lots of tables in the book, couldn't we just get someone to do a spreadsheet indexing them and then you can sort/filter/print however you like.

[Crafty_Alex]

Rather than do lots of tables in the book, couldn't we just get someone to do a spreadsheet indexing them and then you can sort/filter/print however you like.

But we still have to do the tables for customers of the book who don't come to the forums Spreadsheets are fine, but they are an enhancement rather than a replacement for core functionality.

[EloiseCartwright]

Fair enough, I wasn't complaining - it's nice to see you ask for feedback. But regardless, I'll probably index them all in a spreadsheet.

[Crafty_Pat]

I will add for clarity that I mean a list breaking down by Level, then Discipline, then Alphabetically by Spell, with brief description.  It'll be slightly more space consuming then a chart will be, so I can't speculate if this would work.

Due to the vast number of spells you could also make it 8 smaller lists, depending on how the spell list chapter is laid out.  Have "The Trickster" then have a list of all 111 spells, listed by level and discipline, with the descriptions, and then have full rules for each spell following.  You could make them sub chapters for ease of naviation.

There are obviously endless table format variations and we only have room for so many (probably no more than 2 - maybe 3 - including the master table that already exists). More than that not only isn't space-conscious it's likely to trigger blowback from everyone, as I'm betting no one will use more than 1 table variation, making the rest of those tables worthless pages.

When you said by level with description, my brain immediately went to the most universal format: By level only, alphabetically within each level, with brief effect summaries for easy reference. Most folks could use that; adding Discipline organization favors specialists over Mages and other universal casters. I suppose we could add Discipline in parentheses after the spell names, but I'm not sure if that would help much.

[Crafty_Pat]

School: Discipline: Level: Spell Name

This is the base one in the book already.

Level: School: Discipline: Spell Name

Hm. I can see the utility but is it compelling enough alongside the brief summary list mentioned in my last post? Methinks not.

[Crafty_Pat]

Fair enough, I wasn't complaining - it's nice to see you ask for feedback. But regardless, I'll probably index them all in a spreadsheet.

If someone's up for doing the work, we'll happily host it. Hell, I could even work with that person ahead of release so it's ready when the book comes out. Anyone who's interested should ping me privately so we can discuss specifics.

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

Level: School: Discipline: Spell Name

Hm. I can see the utility but is it compelling enough alongside the brief summary list mentioned in my last post? Methinks not.

How about just "Level: All the spells listed in alphabetical order, nothing else on the table".

That's how it is in the core book, and I've found it useful for replacing spells on Paths.

[Deral]

I think the already defined base table is perfect for characters choosing spells, and with the rest of the spells being listed simply alphabetically, I can't think of many other roles a table would have to fill, except maybe one that would more easily facilitate random-spell choosing.

While I'm thinking about it, is there already something to readily denote Preparation cost in the table? That's the first thing that comes to mind when I try to think of anything the original Grimoire was lacking.

[meadicus]

I suppose the challenge is to balance the requirements of those will access to all spells and want to see them listed all in one table, and all the specialist casters who only want too see their school, rather than having to pick out the spells of their own school from amidst the mass of them all.

The current table in the FC book is useless if you're a specialist caster of any kind, such as the Alchemist, as you cannot tell what spells are available without page-flipping to the descriptions. I would suggest separate tables by school, like the ones in current two spellbound pdf releases. It would still be of advantage to the general caster who thinks "I feel like picking up some weather magic, let's have a look at them."

Either way the spell descriptions simply have to be laid out all at once alphabetically. I've a 2nd Ed D&D book on the shelf where they're organised by level then description, and it's impossible to find any spell in there during a game, i.e. when speed of looking up the spell description really matters.

[VisualStatic]

My choice, at least one table being this:

Level: Spell Name: