I'm very excited to share a new update to the Player's Companion. It's got reams of new content, including the magical experimentation and spell design rules you unlocked when you hit Bonus Goal #2. All Kickstarter backers have been notified via email of the download link. I hope you'll check out the new rules and let us know what you think.
Can the pre-order people get a little love too? 
I think the rules for experimentation are awesome! However there were some mistakes I noticed with the spell creation guidelines:
First of all, some of the source multipliers are off. For instance the healing multiplier for divine says 0 on the healing table, and the illusion modifier for arcane also has a 0. I think you meant to put x1 in both of those spots.
Also, some of the tables conflict with the examples. For instance, in the Transmogrification tables the multiplier for targeting 3000 sq-ft of plants is x0.35, while in the example of growth of plants the multiplier is x9 and a separate modifier is given for affecting plants (x0.04). However, I have noticed that these multiply out to around what it says on the table, but I think it should be explained more clearly.
I hope that helps.
Mage, anyplace it says "0" it should read x1. I had initially been using a sligthly different system and forgot to clear up some mistakes, it seems. 0 = x1.
The example for Growth of Plants is wrong. I found a better way to present the same outcome, which is what you see represented in the tables. Sorry for the confusion! I'll get this cleaned up in the next draft.
If you catch any other incosistencies, do alert me. Thanks!
OOPS. I see v.7 now in Downloads. Lots of new content. Looks great!
I’ve just downloaded the update, and I’m going to read it ASAP. Spell guidelines is a very welcomed addition as one of my players really wants some “invoke creature” spell 
Page 169, Necromancy mishap table, result 6 major needs looked at.
Also page 174, effect 14 has “If you become undead, this effect is removed” twice.
I hate to multipost, but I’m going to go to bed here… any minute now… right.
Page 178, “For example, greatly affects the cost of the spell.” does not parse well.
Curious about why 1d6+1 per level and 1d8 are priced differently, since they have the same expectation.
Page 179, Dismember description has “no saving throw for no effect (x0.5)”. Should probably be “saving throw for no effect (x0.5)”.
Overall, though, I’m really liking the spell construction rules… I get the feeling that they’d let me build something much like <a href=http://www.rpgnow.com/product_info.php?products_id=20498>True Sorcery for ACKS (though getting the class balance pricing right would be an utter impossibility). Would probably look something like “You have a pool of spell points. Casting spells costs a number of spell points equal to their point cost in spell construction. Maximum point cost of a spell that you can cast is 5 + 5*caster level. Pick one primary type of spell (blast, detect, enchant, heal, illusion, or transmogrify) which you can use at no penalty, and a second which you can use at +5 base cost. The others schools are forbidden to you. During combat, make up spells and deduct from your pool of points appropriately when you cast them.”
Absolutely love the spell research rules and mishaps. I also adore how you’ve taken into account that not all X level spells are equal. Great potential in that and probably made the framework much easier to build.
I was also thinking this could be used for a spontaneous master mechanic…
Other than the table errors mentioned above there are a few questions/quibbles.
Blast spells and elemental type. Right now the elemental has no effect on cost so why not build everything as force damage like magic missiles? Almost nothing can resist that damage type while plenty of things resist fire.
Defensive and buff spells…where do they go? How do you build Shield, Protection from evil, Shimmer, Bless anxious Prayer for example?
Movement spells. Teleport, Dim Door, Haste…where do they fit?
Summoning. I know b/x has few examples of summoning spells but still how would you build Invisible Stalked and Wall of X type spells?
Anyway, love the system and love the research stuff. It’s awesome. Well worth the wait!
Thanks for catching all the errors, guys.
As far as the the missing spell types, I am still working on them. I will probably do a Conjuration category, a Travel category, and a Protection category. Some categories of spells prove much harder than others, depending on how weird the spells are.
As far as elemental types, I think that all the elementals are roughly equal. I hadn't thought about the "force" issue but will give it some thought.
One point in the favor of non-force spells is that the Elementalism proficiency lets you boost your damage by about 1 die size; there is no corresponding proficiency to boost force spells. Specialist elementalists can generate more damage on average, but less against specific targets.
Not all arcane casters have access to that Prof so I don’t think that should be a factor in pricing the spells.
It seems the easiest thing would be to include a modifies for force spells and if that brings magic missile above a first level spell just assume it is a breakthrough.
Not all arcane casters have access to that Prof so I don’t think that should be a factor in pricing the spells.
It seems the easiest thing would be to include a modifies for force spells and if that brings magic missile above a first level spell just assume it is a breakthrough.
The Elven Ranger is still wrong…
Page 18 the hit dice should be 1d6 consistently…
Hi guys -
I've added a new effect modifier called "elemental". It's a x1 modifier - so a spell can have untyped damage or elemental damage and it costs the same.
I know that in 3.5, magic missile and similar spells are considered to be "force damage," which is laden with advantages, such as being able to strike incorporeal creatures, or being able to bypass both spell resistance and energy resistance if conjured. But this is not the case in ACKS, where these effects don't apply.
So really we are comparing a spell like magic missile to a spell like lighnting bolt. What is the advantage or disadvantage of "going elemental"?
The advantages of elemental spells are: (1) Elementalism proficiency can amp up damage, (2) Certain creatures are vulnerable to elemental damage, and (3) Elemental spells can have incidental effects, such as setting fire to things.
The disadvantages of elemental spells are: (1) There are spells and magic items that can resist elemental attacks, (2) certain creatures are resistant to elemental attacks, and (3) the incidental effects of elemental attacks can be unwelcome.
On the whole, I don't think it's particularly clear that an elemental or non-elemental spell is at a disadvantage or advantage. Certainly in ACKS playtesting, players actively sought out Elementalism proficiency and then made their Magic Missiles elemental, and researched other elemental spells, so if in-game behavior is any evidence, elemental spells may actaully be preferred.
Obviously it's very easy to modify the system should you disagree. You can make elemental have a lower multiplier or add a multiplier for force spells.
For enough. I guess my concern is a ‘force ball’ spell that works like fireball without the pesky chance of elemental immunity. Knowing my players I think they’ll immediately want to go for that. I think if there were more ‘force’ spells players wouldn’t be so quick for elemental, but that’s hard to say for sure.
Fair enough. I guess my concern is a ‘force ball’ spell that works like fireball without the pesky chance of elemental immunity. Knowing my players I think they’ll immediately want to go for that. I think if there were more ‘force’ spells players wouldn’t be so quick for elemental, but that’s hard to say for sure.