Houserules for starting spells

Do anyone houserule the first spell for spellcasters?
If you compare it with the rules when a spellcasting leader dies it's fluffwise wierd for randomotherherodude to be able to master magic better than actual trained magicians (compare choosing spells to randomize them). But solving this by just letting magicians choosing the first spell should up the initial pointcost for them quite a lot or make them a lot more powerful than vanilla rules tell us.

In the expansion Relics of the Crusade, wizards get to choose *all* their spells instead of rolling. That may be a bit powerful, but when we first started playing we thought it said that you choose your first and then roll normally for the others.

In practice, all being able to choose your first spell does is let the caster earn experience at the same rate as every other hero and doesn't really need a price increase or make them more powerful. Someone who has rolled a good spell is just as potent for the same cost as someone that has chosen the good spell.

Everyone knows the detrimental effect rolling a poor starting spell has on a starting warband and choosing the first eliminates that - putting everyone on an even footing at the start of the campaign. I think once this current RotC campaign is done we will be house-ruling choosing your first spell.

I'd say that if you could choose your first spell, warbands without mages will be a bit hampered. I think mercs are a bit weak as it is, so I'd rather not do this, but that's just my personal opinion of course and I've never been a big fan of mercs anyway.

From what I have found, allowing casters to start with the spell/prayer they want is no more unbalancing than allowing warriors to start with the weapons they want. And this is coming from someone who *is* a fan of mercs (I love my Marienbergers).

Then I'll take your word for it, as I've yet to test it myself After all, I nearly always roll some next-to-useless spell myself, so there would be nice with a change.

I've earlier proposed that my gaming group should try with rolling two d6 and choosing the one they find the best, but choosing might be more fun.

We allow the spell-casting types to pick their first spell, but they roll randomly for the others. We have been doing it for years, and no one has found it to cause problems.

With the warlock (if you start with one), we let you pick one of his two starting spells but not the other.

When I ran the numbers in my head spellcasters seems to be a bit cheap for their potential, I put that difference down to the random spell generation and possibility of a small payback, hence the idea of needing to up their price a bit.

We've never tested anything cept vanilla before and if you others haven't experienced issues with free pickings I think we will try that in our upcomming campaign.

Our house rules are similar to some people (I think because I didn't make it up (I think)) in that starting spell casters roll twice on the spell list and the player gets to choose one of those two spells. This is the first campaign where we have tried it and everyone seems happy (as opposed to the past where people got stuck with whatever spell they rolled often not what they wanted).

We let people choose their starting spell (though only for warband members, not hired swords) and I would definitely recommend you to do the same, I have never quite managed to grok why spells and prayers should be randomized when every other aspect of the starting team is determined by the player (within the boundaries of the chosen warband). If people are happy with their warbands, the game tends to be more fun for everyone involved (imho); and as far as balance is concerned: both dwarves and mercenaries are quite strong, as warbands go, and their chance of victory should not be dependent on a bad starting spell for their opponents wizard...

we also have the house-rule to choose the first spell, but roll for the others. this went very well so far but I must say, that we have no "non-casting-warband" (like mercenaries) in our group.

We just find choosing the first spell fun and because everyone does the same, it does not become unbalancing in any way.

btw: I don't understand why mercenaries don't have any magic. there might be a reason fluff-wise, i don't know too much about that. but rulewise I can't see any reason at all. they have nothing to compensate for the lack of magic. not even their max member number (which is at a measly 12 iirc)...

"btw: I don't understand why mercenaries don't have any magic. there might be a reason fluff-wise, i don't know too much about that."

Well, they're just a bunch of hired swords looking for some cash. Warlocks and such are fairly specialized guys. Also, once the mercs have a few bucks they can hire a wizard - preferably one with a pointy had and a staff with a knob on the end.

Dahag wrote:

btw: I don't understand why mercenaries don't have any magic. there might be a reason fluff-wise, i don't know too much about that. but rulewise I can't see any reason at all. they have nothing to compensate for the lack of magic. not even their max member number (which is at a measly 12 iirc)...

Fluff. Bad fluff, but fluff non-the-less. For some reason they chose to set the game in the Warhammer world's past, before the College of Magic was established and therefore before humans learned 'good' magic.
Mercenary bands have a max of 15. They also have a broad selection of weapons and most bands have the option of a home grown wizard thru skills and equipment.

thanks mweaver and von kurst for your input on the fluff. Ok, 15 max members and a heterogenous equipment list does some compensating. i'd still choose witchhunters over mercenaries anytime. but that maybe because I'm really fond of casting spells (or prayers in this case).

but i did not mean to move away from the original topic...

It would be nice for my necromancer so I could always get number 6 at the beginning. Which makes the other zombie based spells gained after useful.