Putting Tier 1 casters in their place

[Otto the Bugbear]

Thinking back at the analysis of basing Psionics off every damn ability score under the sun and how people whined about it, it strikes me that the underlying theme of the whining is one where people that want their casters to be gods recognize how brutal the change was. They seemed to read between the lines that WotC both recognized one method of toning down these gods without simply issuing errata for the spells, which are the real source of the problem, and engaged the noise making machines.

The more I think about it the idea, it's not really too much MAD. It looks on the surface like it might tone down casters to tier 2 (lower? hard to imagine), but looking deeper it is instead even more extreme "ivory tower game design". Players not as adept at the mechanics (they're not "bad players", they just struggle with the mechanics or the mechanics simply rarely cross their mind), who cannot afford to fall into a pit trap with poisoned spikes in the bottom, will simply take spells that seem the coolest to them. Their spell selection will be all over the map. Good players will simply focus on one or two ability scores, take off-spells that have no saves, and shun those that use their character's dump stat. If this is the end result one is willing to accept, simply make all casters focused specialization and call it good. At least that way it's less of a trap. And you don't have to add a line to each spell reading "Save DC: Con" or "Save DC: Str."

Due to past experience, however, dual-casting just isn't quite far enough. I'd throw out tri-stat casting, where the mental stats get used for highest level, save DC and bonus spells (or bonus spell points). Wizard might be Int (highest level), Wis (bonus spells), Cha (save DC). I'm not crazy about this one either, simply because it keeps dancing around the issue of spell design. The thing that we all fall into (myself included, over and over), is that we recognize the issue of spell design, but simply don't want to tackle rewriting 100s of spells, or perhaps thousands with all the splat books.

[veekie]

Well, overall, consistency is the thing. Multi-stat casting goes against the genre easily(as the above debates on what stats to slap on Conjuration etc show).
Dual stat casting(plus a third stat for health/whatevers)nips the monostat problem in the bud.
The other parts of casting being problematic is not the stats, what is being done by stat-per-school is simply throwing in different problems and sorta hoping they cancel out the other problems.
So, fix the spells, not just throw in positives and negatives and hope they cancel out.

Transmutation - It's power lies in buffs and debuffs, it's "broken" lies in stat replacement buffs(read everything that says turn into monster). Its "too good" lies in containing effects like Telekinesis and such, which strictly speaking is none of transmutation's business of Change. Save or Die stuff are their own problem, but since Transmutation is also supposed to be good at debuffing(right next to necromancy), you can simply make the SoDs into the secondary effects of debuffs(so after Slowed is frozen in time, or petrified, after being hit with a -10 to misc stats and reduced to Dimunitive is being permanently stuck as a that way, etc)
Compacted down, it's stat modifying buffs(+X to stats instead of "you are now a fullcasting hydra, have fun") and debuffs.

Conjuration - Power lies in summoning and BFC, plus a not to be underestimated utility. Broken lies in Calling effects bringing in any damned thing you want from the MMs and Creation effects bringing in any fun mundane materials like multiple gallons of Black Lotus. Too Good lies in getting the blasting Evocation should have(and even the fluff justification is weak, you could Conjure a physical attack or a caustic liquid, but 'summoning' lightning is a tad stretched). Stripped to its core, it looks much the same, with summoning, BFC(with the more insanely good ones like Black Hentacles tamed) and physical/acid blasting.

...and so forth.

[RobbyPants]

Spell preparation:  I must say, I really like how Spirit Shaman handles this: retrieve X amount of spells each day, then use those as you like.  It just makes more sense than traditional prepared-casting.

Well, the Spirit Shaman gives you a fluid spell list.  It's locked in by day, but you can change it around from day to day.  Other than forcing a more narrow focus on any one day, this is probably more permissive than standard prepared casting.

Bigger hit will have to be the spell list. I mean, screwing with the rest just reduces how many times a day they can completely change a situation. Devil's in the details.

Exactly.  Limiting how many spells someone gets isn't that big of a deal if they still have a few spells handy that can simply win encounters.  Simply making it harder to cast lots of win spells will result in more boring casters, who instead, only resort to one or two win spells instead of half a dozen.  The end effect will be the same, and it will be more boring for everyone involved in the mean time.

How about...

Using spell points:
One stat is used to derive the highest level spell. Traditionally this would be Int for arcane casters and Wis for divine casters.
Cha is used to determine spell save DCs.
Con is used to determine the number of spell points gained, emulating the physical strain placed on casters for tapping into the source of magic. Like skill points, raising the Con score through temporary means does not grant additional spell points.

I know casters usually place an emphasis on Con after their main stat, but this makes it even more of a balancing game.

When you say spell points, are you talking about the psionic/Unearthed Arcana version?  If so, these tend to make casters more powerful, not less powerful.  Sure, the MAD part you added in is a bit of a hit, but SP offer lots of versatility to casters.  You end up turning prepared casters into spontaneous casters who aren't even limited by spell slots.  This has two notable effects:

• When the caster hits 2nd level spells, they can trade those in for three times as many 1st level spells.  Sure, 2nd level spells are badass compared to 1st level, but if Grease, Sleep, Color Spray, Charm Person, or Silent Image will do, why not cast three of those to one 2nd level spell?
• At high level, you can convert lots of more useless low level slots into better high level spells.  The net result is more high level spells.

I don't see how offering this kind of versatility is offset by an increase in MAD.

[veekie]

I personally figure offering versatility(especially on the fly versatility) is good because it gives less experienced players more room to work in, while the more experienced will be hit where it hurts...the more powerful spells.

Increased MAD is just to make them more similar to other classes.

[RobbyPants]

I personally figure offering versatility(especially on the fly versatility) is good because it gives less experienced players more room to work in, while the more experienced will be hit where it hurts...the more powerful spells.

How so?  How does limiting the number of spells known limit their powerful spells?

Increased MAD is just to make them more similar to other classes.

This is likely true.

[veekie]

I mean, separate changes, the most powerful spells need to be nerfed anyway, because one spell solving the encounter does not a fun game make. It is unrelated to the number of spells known....except for making it more possible to solve encounters with the right combination of spells.

[RobbyPants]

Oh, so you were commenting both on limiting spells available and nerfing powerful spells.  That makes more sense.  I thought you were implying that limiting the spell selection on it's own would somehow deal with powerful spells.

[wotmaniac]

oh, a number of spells are on the nerfing block, for sure.
even so, by also limiting # of spells (in this case, that's done with dual-stat), you can tend to encourage durational spells (many of which require round-to-round attention) over one-shots; and, as a general rule, durational spells tend to be weaker than one-shots (yes, there are exceptions -- which does not disprove the rule -- but the worst of those offenders are the ones that would most likely end up on the chopping/nerfing block).

When you say spell points, are you talking about the psionic/Unearthed Arcana version?  If so, these tend to make casters more powerful, not less powerful.  Sure, the MAD part you added in is a bit of a hit, but SP offer lots of versatility to casters.  You end up turning prepared casters into spontaneous casters who aren't even limited by spell slots.  This has two notable effects:

• When the caster hits 2nd level spells, they can trade those in for three times as many 1st level spells.  Sure, 2nd level spells are badass compared to 1st level, but if Grease, Sleep, Color Spray, Charm Person, or Silent Image will do, why not cast three of those to one 2nd level spell?
• At high level, you can convert lots of more useless low level slots into better high level spells.  The net result is more high level spells.

I don't see how offering this kind of versatility is offset by an increase in MAD.

Here's the deal -- the biggest issue I've ever had with "manna points" is when someone tries to nova.  my players have a great respect for resource management; and, as such, they simply don't nova -- they just don't.  whenever someone happens to join my group that does like to nova, they find out real quick why my players don't do it.  sure, this may be a bit gygaxian of me; but oh well .... I will not play a game where the 5 minute adventuring day is the norm (or even acceptable); and once this little detail gets worked out, everything works fine, and much fun is had by all -- it's all about setting expectations.

Now, given that my players are resource managers, anything that taxes resources (in this case, MAD-ness) further encourages a lower level of play.  They start asking themselves "is it really worth it to blow a high level power right now?" -- and unless it's a boss fight, then that answer is usually "no".

But that's just my experience -- YMMV.

[veekie]

Theres some tricks to reduce the tendency to nova. One of the ones I know is to give sponsored casting cost(i.e. (Level) spell points free per spell), so if you use weaker spells, you get a lot more effective points than if you blew it all on several large spells. Another is causing status effects if you cast spells above a certain point cost from fatigue.

[wotmaniac]

Theres some tricks to reduce the tendency to nova. One of the ones I know is to give sponsored casting cost(i.e. (Level) spell points free per spell), so if you use weaker spells, you get a lot more effective points than if you blew it all on several large spells.

but doesn't that already happen with D&D's manna system(s)?  if I have 170 manna, that can get me 10 9th-level powers, 15 6th-level powers, 34 3rd-level powers, or 170 1st-level powers (provided of course you're not augmenting any of them).
Unless you're talking about something a little more severe .....

Another is causing status effects if you cast spells above a certain point cost from fatigue.

I've thought about this one -- but I'm very hesitant.  I've considered something similar to what UA talks about with causing fatigue when you've dropped to half your manna, and exhausted when you've dropped to a quarter your manna.  what you're really doing is just discouraging any adventuring once you're at half your manna -- effectively, you might as well just give them half the manna allotment and leave off the rest (yes, I like the narrative; but at some point, you just have to give in to a certain level of gameism).

Unless, of course, you're talking about making things more taxing just based on spell level -- now, that would be an entirely different discussion.  and something I've not really considered .... I see where you're going with this; but, please, elaborate.

[Otto the Bugbear]

How about...

Using spell points:
One stat is used to derive the highest level spell. Traditionally this would be Int for arcane casters and Wis for divine casters.
Cha is used to determine spell save DCs.
Con is used to determine the number of spell points gained, emulating the physical strain placed on casters for tapping into the source of magic. Like skill points, raising the Con score through temporary means does not grant additional spell points.

I know casters usually place an emphasis on Con after their main stat, but this makes it even more of a balancing game.

When you say spell points, are you talking about the psionic/Unearthed Arcana version?  If so, these tend to make casters more powerful, not less powerful.  Sure, the MAD part you added in is a bit of a hit, but SP offer lots of versatility to casters.  You end up turning prepared casters into spontaneous casters who aren't even limited by spell slots.  This has two notable effects:

• When the caster hits 2nd level spells, they can trade those in for three times as many 1st level spells.  Sure, 2nd level spells are badass compared to 1st level, but if Grease, Sleep, Color Spray, Charm Person, or Silent Image will do, why not cast three of those to one 2nd level spell?
• At high level, you can convert lots of more useless low level slots into better high level spells.  The net result is more high level spells.

I don't see how offering this kind of versatility is offset by an increase in MAD.

I only threw spell points out there because someone earlier had mentioned them. Personally, I don't like spell points, but if the discussion moved to including the idea, then I figured why not mention it in the post.

When it comes right down to it, I'd rather see three things happen.

• Nerf or delete the worst offending spells. Possibly increase the spell level.
• Set up a system more like ToB.
• Use of a hybrid system like the 'Designer's Intent' thread. Some spells are spontaneous while others are prepared.

These wouldn't necessarily all happen together. All together may not work either, but I haven't looked into it enough.

[RobbyPants]

When you say spell points, are you talking about the psionic/Unearthed Arcana version?  If so, these tend to make casters more powerful, not less powerful.  Sure, the MAD part you added in is a bit of a hit, but SP offer lots of versatility to casters.  You end up turning prepared casters into spontaneous casters who aren't even limited by spell slots.  This has two notable effects:

• When the caster hits 2nd level spells, they can trade those in for three times as many 1st level spells.  Sure, 2nd level spells are badass compared to 1st level, but if Grease, Sleep, Color Spray, Charm Person, or Silent Image will do, why not cast three of those to one 2nd level spell?
• At high level, you can convert lots of more useless low level slots into better high level spells.  The net result is more high level spells.

I don't see how offering this kind of versatility is offset by an increase in MAD.

Here's the deal -- the biggest issue I've ever had with "manna points" is when someone tries to nova.  my players have a great respect for resource management; and, as such, they simply don't nova -- they just don't.  whenever someone happens to join my group that does like to nova, they find out real quick why my players don't do it.  sure, this may be a bit gygaxian of me; but oh well .... I will not play a game where the 5 minute adventuring day is the norm (or even acceptable); and once this little detail gets worked out, everything works fine, and much fun is had by all -- it's all about setting expectations.

Now, given that my players are resource managers, anything that taxes resources (in this case, MAD-ness) further encourages a lower level of play.  They start asking themselves "is it really worth it to blow a high level power right now?" -- and unless it's a boss fight, then that answer is usually "no".

But that's just my experience -- YMMV.

You can nova with SP and you can nova with spell slots.  My complaint about SP is that they're strictly speaking, a power up to casters; particularly prepared casters.  So, that right there, is a boost to tier 1 characters.

Yes, you can nerf them by making them MAD and by nerfing specific spells, but SP is yet another boost that will have to be offset.

[SneeR]

Flavor-wise, sorcerer's would be great with SP, since it is a more organic system fits such a caster. I would keep everything the same with sorcerers, but change them to an SP system.

Since wizards are the real buggers, I'd make them keep the less-advantageous slot system. I always pictured wizard casting as very stringent and numerical. 5 of this, 3 of that, 2 times per day, no mix-matching.
I mean, he gets more spells per day based on INT. Those things are hard to memorize.

A bit of MAD doesn't exactly pull the problem by its roots, but it is a move in the right direction, albeit small.

[veekie]

Theres some tricks to reduce the tendency to nova. One of the ones I know is to give sponsored casting cost(i.e. (Level) spell points free per spell), so if you use weaker spells, you get a lot more effective points than if you blew it all on several large spells.

but doesn't that already happen with D&D's manna system(s)?  if I have 170 manna, that can get me 10 9th-level powers, 15 6th-level powers, 34 3rd-level powers, or 170 1st-level powers (provided of course you're not augmenting any of them).
Unless you're talking about something a little more severe .....

The idea is to firstly, massively slash spell point capacity to 1/4 of normal.
Second, each spell would cost 2xSpell Level to cast.
When you cast a spell, you get a discount equal to 1/2 your caster level to the sp cost, each spell costs a minimum of 1sp.
So if you nova, you go dry VERY fast, you'd be getting out maybe 2 spells of your highest level before you're done for the day. If you make use of basic spells instead you'd last all day, AND reserve your high level spells for emergencies.

Another is causing status effects if you cast spells above a certain point cost from fatigue.

I've thought about this one -- but I'm very hesitant.  I've considered something similar to what UA talks about with causing fatigue when you've dropped to half your manna, and exhausted when you've dropped to a quarter your manna.  what you're really doing is just discouraging any adventuring once you're at half your manna -- effectively, you might as well just give them half the manna allotment and leave off the rest (yes, I like the narrative; but at some point, you just have to give in to a certain level of gameism).

Unless, of course, you're talking about making things more taxing just based on spell level -- now, that would be an entirely different discussion.  and something I've not really considered .... I see where you're going with this; but, please, elaborate.

Base the drawback off the spell level instead of your spell point capacity. A quick hack is to make it so that  you can safely cast spells of 1/4 your level(so at level 4, you can cast 1st level spells without fatigue, etc), and all spells above that cause status effects.
Now, obviously this has issues when you come up against status effect removers, and if it has a save or percentile roll it just means finding somewhere else to mess with the PC, while certain statuses just do nothing to casters(fatigue, I'm looking at you).
So you'd need to provide it's own drawbacks and statuses for magical disabilities, with severity ratings dependent on how far above your capacity you're going. Casting 1 level above your safe level automatically inflicts a fatigue/sicken/shaken equivalent, casting 2 makes it Exhausted equivalent, casting 3 levels above(note that this is almost ever only to happen with 7-9th level spells ) might have a debilitating effect that removes you from the encounter. Durations are in rounds, downgrading to the next severity at the end of the duration.
Have the conditions stack up, first increasing duration, then severity.
E.g. A 16th level wizard(safe spells 4th) casts a 5th level spell and becomes fatigued from the backlash for several rounds. He then casts the same spell again, and now hes shaken for an hour. Unrelenting, he does it a third time, and now hes exhausted for several rounds, after which he'd be fatigued for an hour.

_{Note I just pulled the whole mechanic out of my ass and the specific numbers are going to be off the walls}

[wotmaniac]

well, my initial instinct towards that level of slashing of mana is that it seems a little severe .... but I'll let that simmer a little more, and come back to it later.

Had another thought, and this one is inspired by the Midnight setting from Fantasy Flight Games.
I'm think that you could have casters "buy" access to schools and levels of spells within those schools.  So, for example, you'd start off with access to Universal + 2 schools, and every "X" # of levels you would be able to add another school to your access list.  you would also break each school in to it's various levels (whether it be as clunky as groups of 3 level, or as granular every single level).  So, when I get to add schools, you only add a specific power level.  Maybe I start with 1st-3rd level of 2 schools, and then if I want to add another school, I only add levels 1-3.  Also, and can't get higher level spells of a school that I have unless I "pay" for it.

ARGH .... I'm running late for work.  I'll pick this back up in the morning.

[veekie]

I'm think that you could have casters "buy" access to schools and levels of spells within those schools.  So, for example, you'd start off with access to Universal + 2 schools, and every "X" # of levels you would be able to add another school to your access list.  you would also break each school in to it's various levels (whether it be as clunky as groups of 3 level, or as granular every single level).  So, when I get to add schools, you only add a specific power level.  Maybe I start with 1st-3rd level of 2 schools, and then if I want to add another school, I only add levels 1-3.  Also, and can't get higher level spells of a school that I have unless I "pay" for it.

I've had this idea before as well, but you'd gave to break down spell schools differently from the D&D schools of magic in order for that to mean much.
One personally favored way is to split it alongside the World of Darkness: Mage arcana. Death(entropic magic and necromancy), Life(healing and transformation of life), Forces(raw energy and physics screwball), Matter(creating, transforming and enhancing the inanimate), Time(timescrew, accelerate, stopping, deceleration, rewinding), Fate(Divination, luck and predestination), Mind(basically Enchantment), Space(dimension screw, teleports, looped space, spatial distortion), Prime(meta-magic, Illusions), Spirit(summoning and binding of Outsiders).
Another is to take  the existing schools and split them up until they're equally granular. Conjuration for example, might be split into Conveyance(all the teleporting and summoning objects) and Summoning(summoning creatures, Calling).

The tricky part is to make sure that any given starting character does not get trapped into 'late blooming' schools, either by pairing late blooming schools with early bloomers or by ensuring all schools perform certain bare minimum functions(basic defensive magic(some thematically adjusted variation of Mage Armor for example) and offensive magic(BFC is nice and all, but the simple fact is that giving them SOME source of direct damage or else some way to augment physical attacks would be universally applicable, if less effective))

[wotmaniac]

I've thought about re-aligning the spells -- but that involves going through the entire spell list and going through the hassle of re-balancing a whole other set of new spell schools.  As far as I can tell, this is just way more hassle than it's worth.

well, let's look at some of how Midnight did this, and kinda go from there:
well, first, they've broken both Evocation and Conjuration in to 2 schools each:
- Greater Conjuration is all the spells with the [calling] and [summoning] descriptors ; Lessor Conjuration is all the other conjuration spells ;
- Greater Evocation is all the spells with an energy descriptor, except [sonic] ; Lesser Evocation has all the non-descriptor spells, as well as all with the [sonic] descriptor.
--- in order to get access to the Greater schools, you must first have access to its Lesser counterpart.

Well, as far as Evocation goes, I personally feel that this further dilutes an already weak school -- I'm thinking that this might have been done while under the assumption of the old paradigm of thinking that evocation actually being strong.

Now, aside from that, on the surface, splitting Conjuration would seem to make Transmutation just way too strong as a stand-alone school, especially if I'm trying to encourage specialization.
However, the way Midnight did it, everybody gets access to Transmutation as well as Universal.  That being the case, splitting any of the schools doesn't seem like such a big deal.

So, here's what I've come up with:
The Wizard, aka, The Specialist
New term: "school-level".  there are 8 schools of magic, and 9 levels of spells in each school.  A "school-level" is a level of spells within a school of magic -- e.g., "necromancy-2" is all 2nd-level spells from the necromancy school, etc.  Basically, there are 63 available school-levels from which to choose (72, minus 9 that are already spoken for by your specialty school)
You start with full access all cantrips, and to Universal + 1 school of your choice (this will be your "specialist" school, with the benefits inherent therein -- but no "banned" schools).  
At each level where you gain a caster level (or whatever), - to include 1st level - you also gain expanded access to other schools ... you get to add 2 "school-levels" to your access list.  Essentially, you gain 2 school-level "slots" at each level.  "School-levels" must be taken in sequence -- for example, before you can take "transmutation-3", you must first have "trans-1" and "trans-2".  Additionally, you must be of appropriate level to take any "school-level" -- for example, you must wait until 5th level to take any "(school)-3" school-level.  You automatically advance Universal and your specialty school without having to expend school-level slots.
There are 2 possible extremes that can manifest (with multiple shades in between):
1) if you want max spell levels in all accessible schools, you can have 9th level spells in 5 schools (+ universal), and 4th level spells in a 6th school.  Incidentally, this doesn't look much different from a normal specialist or focused specialist (actually, it splits the middle)
2) if you want to evenly cover all schools, you get 9th level spells in your specialty school, 6th level spells in 5 more schools, and 5th level spells in the remaining 2.
And, like I said, there are quite a few possibilities for variance between those 2 extremes.

The other option involves if any of the schools are split (as described above), then you also get full access to Transmutation (which I'm still on the fence with).  The problem I have with this is that this forces a bit of homogenization, which I'm trying to avoid.  However, if one did go with this approach, you might want to switch things up -- the specifics of which would depend on just how you split the schools, etc. (which, by the way, I am prepared to address if need be).

The idea behind all of this is to re-align the casting paradigm so that it is more consistent with how everybody else gains abilities -- i.e., having to start at the bottom whenever you want to diversify in a new area of focus (this is the case with feats, class features, etc. -- why should casting be any different?).

Thoughts?



edit: BTW .... POST #2000. 

[veekie]

There should be something you can do to split Transmutation right? If you standardise Polymorph spells into variable but predefined bonuses with a predefined list of acceptable special abilities.

[wotmaniac]

Well, what is there to do but to split it in to those of the [polymorph] subschool and those not of that subschool?  Or maybe split based on whether it effects creatures vs. effects inanimate material/objects?

Speaking of which, would it be out of line to say that bonded pets with the "share spells" ability do not benefit from spells of the [polymorph] subschool?  That could very well calm down some of the shenanigans that I have personally witnessed.

[veekie]

Or maybe split based on whether it effects creatures vs. effects inanimate material/objects?

It'd be a good breakdown I think. That splits the more direct Transmutations from the buffs.

Polymorph is itself a special case, I think, specifically that spell's fault. Just cap the maximum stats from it, the maximum natural weapons from it, movement modes available at each level of polymorph, maximum/minimum size and special abilities available to a predefined list. Expand these as you go to higher level variants.