Should the number of gems a Gemcaster receives really be random, especially when you're using numbers like 1d2? The chances of you not having enough gems to attune to every spell you know are actually pretty low anyway. It seems like an unnecessary clutter of numbers to me. - Viatos 19:44, April 19, 2010 (UTC)

I did a bit of editing and decided to only make the starting number random. All other gems have to be purchased or found. I'm also thinking of adding a value system for gems that have stored spells. Synthii 09:24, April 29, 2010 (UTC)


Just wondering what your arguments for making this a wizard level class were. It has unlimited castings, but from a fairly restricted pool and at a delayed rate... I'm not saying it's lower, off-hand, I'm just not sure and wanted to hear your thoughts on the matter. - TarkisFlux 16:03, April 29, 2010 (UTC)

Mostly I just thought this would be something different to offer players, something unique. It is the first class i've ever done though, so if you have any critiques that would be helpful, do let me know. As for the balance, well, i just guessed really. wasn't quite sure which one to pick. - Synthii 04:57, May 1, 2010 (UTC)

Gem rules Edit

The gem rules seem incomplete. What kind of gems do you need, how valuable, what is a flawed or flawless gem, is there something in between, what properties take the penalty/get the bonus (range? area? save DC? casting time?)

Also, you left the 1d2 in Attune Gem. Is that an error, or is that meant to be there? --IGTN 19:12, April 29, 2010 (UTC)

Well, like the author box says, it still is getting touched up a bit. I realize i probably left a few things in that i meant to delete, but as it is the page gives you enough information to make a class, and by the time you are higher up in levels, this should be finished. I will fix that Attune Gem spot now Synthii 05:00, May 1, 2010 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.