I'm currently playing a spellcaster who's making a lot of short dips into the lower paths, to the point that I believe I may have learned all the Free Access spells that I am actually interested in for the lowest level (for there are cheaper and better variants in the paths I have taken), if not all the spells that I could learn, from the level 1-10 Free Access spell list in the core book.

Aside from Sheeles in general and the rule on spending DP to get magical learning, this campaign has not yet touched on the Arcana Exxet, so please do not answer with subpaths; I don't want to reverse-engineer the subpath spells to work like core spells do and otherwise refuse to use them out of principle.

Leaving aside the thought of simply inventing spells to fill in the gaps, I had a thought of combining two slots of a lower level to make a slot of a higher level.

Would it be potentially unbalancing to convert two 1-10 slots into a 1-20 slot and so on? (two 1-20 to a 1-30, etc. etc.)

  • \$\begingroup\$ @V2Blast this isn't about DnD spell slots, which is what the tag says it's for, so I'm going to revert that, especially since this is about learning spells and not casting them. If you have a counterargument, I'd like to know, though. \$\endgroup\$ – Stackstuck Apr 9 at 6:58
  • \$\begingroup\$ The tag's not specific to D&D spell slots, it's just an RPG where they're commonly used. I haven't played Anima so I don't know if the concept of spell slots is substantially different there; I'll leave it up to you and others to figure out if the tag's appropriate :) \$\endgroup\$ – V2Blast Apr 9 at 19:23
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Yeah I threw an edit up on the tag wiki about that. Anyway it's better tagged now. \$\endgroup\$ – Stackstuck Apr 9 at 20:44

This question does not have a strict answer. But I will go with: yes, it will be very unbalanced. Not very noticeable on lower levels, but free access spells can go over level 80 (if I remember correctly) and it could become very overpowered, very quickly.

If you are picking up a lot of different paths of magic and you have free access spells slots because you literally have no more options, then "bad luck". It could be used to invent a spell, yes. But a spell on that level of power and always considering that they are strictly worse than a similar one from an specific magic path.

  • \$\begingroup\$ Strictly speaking, pretty much this. Splashing into a lot of paths and running out of spells? Tough. In my experience playing a wizard and having the option to subpath was part of the reason why the Arcana was written. Additionally, there's no need to "Convert" the system. The Arcana's changes in the magic system reflect that of the un-translated core exxet. The spells from the Core Exxet WERE translated however: community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/… In short. You don't need to reverse engineer anything. \$\endgroup\$ – Riddley Apr 9 at 20:52
  • \$\begingroup\$ That's nice, but we're not using it. \$\endgroup\$ – Stackstuck Apr 9 at 20:56
  • \$\begingroup\$ Also, in regards to the answer: In practice, I think it would only be viable to go up one level (group) with this, possibly two in extreme situations. Not from any number of 1-10 slots to a 1-80, anyway. I'll do the math really quick. \$\endgroup\$ – Stackstuck Apr 9 at 21:01
  • \$\begingroup\$ Yeah, it would take 128 1-10 Free Access slots to get to a 1-80 slot. \$\endgroup\$ – Stackstuck Apr 9 at 21:02
  • \$\begingroup\$ Here's a better idea. Rewarded spell levels = to the spell slot. The book already covers that. You can use Table 57 as a reference here. 2-10 = 2 magic levels, 12-20 = 4, 22-30 = 6. And so on. I'd still be inclined to impose limits on it though. Not sure. \$\endgroup\$ – Riddley Apr 9 at 21:18

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.