Why? Because the rule serves no real use in the game thats why. Besides as a DM I already control what spells are in the game. A hard cap serves no purpose that simply saying "No, you can't have that spell, how about you make something that does X instead" won't already do.
Now I know some DM's who do not count spells created by the magic user against that limit. Thats not a bad rule but I think % to learn, a rule I do use ,covers that nicely. Can't learn fireball? No problem. Create your own version.
Also a lot of the games that I run have lists and list of extra spells, from Dragon, from the web or just from my own brain.I figure if I don't put a limit on how many spells they can know they might take a chance in something a little less ordinary once in a while and that means for fun for all.
It’s Tolkien Reading Day
-
I recently started rereading *The Silmarillion*. I had last read it over
two decades ago. I liked it then but I’m really enjoying it this time!
Despite b...
4 weeks ago
I've got to agree with you on this one. In fact, given the propensity of some settings (Forgotten Realms) to have a plethora of new spells, I couldn't really see how it could be used in any sort of practical sense. "So sorry! You filled up all your 4th level spell-learning-slots, so you'll never be able to memorize 'Elminster's Fire-sphere of Doom'".
ReplyDeleteThe implication is that the spells in the "official" list are all there are, and the reality is that that's just not the case.