Author Topic: What Would It Take For Non-Casters To Be On Par With Casters?  (Read 8313 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Littha

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2155
    • Email
Re: What Would It Take For Non-Casters To Be On Par With Casters?
« Reply #20 on: October 06, 2011, 11:35:50 PM »
  • Restrict casters thematically.  I'd be happy if they all got turned into something in the middle ground between a Dread Necromancer and a Sorcerer.  Sorcs agonize too much about their particular spell choices (annoying), but there aren't enough Dread Necro type classes to go around.  But, something along those lines, that way 1 spellcaster can't be all things to all situations.

Along this idea, how about making the dread necro list contain every necromancy spell? Of course when you work on others you would have to be careful with Transmuters and Conjurers, possibly by splitting the schools down some more and having a summoner and a creator rather than conjurer.

Unbeliever

  • King Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 766
Re: What Would It Take For Non-Casters To Be On Par With Casters?
« Reply #21 on: October 06, 2011, 11:46:14 PM »
  • Restrict casters thematically.  I'd be happy if they all got turned into something in the middle ground between a Dread Necromancer and a Sorcerer.  Sorcs agonize too much about their particular spell choices (annoying), but there aren't enough Dread Necro type classes to go around.  But, something along those lines, that way 1 spellcaster can't be all things to all situations.

Along this idea, how about making the dread necro list contain every necromancy spell? Of course when you work on others you would have to be careful with Transmuters and Conjurers, possibly by splitting the schools down some more and having a summoner and a creator rather than conjurer.
I'll admit that I don't love the way the schools are broken down.  Honestly, if I were GMing and someone could credibly pitch to me how a spell fits the Dread Necro's idiom (and especially their DN's idiom), I'd let it fly.  But, I am perhaps more hand waivey than some others when it comes to these things.

But, yeah, stuff along these lines.


Littha

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2155
    • Email
Re: What Would It Take For Non-Casters To Be On Par With Casters?
« Reply #23 on: October 07, 2011, 06:25:21 AM »
Along this idea, how about making the dread necro list contain every necromancy spell?

No. What makes the dread necro and pals relatively balanced it's precisely that they automatically don't know dozens of spels per level.

If you want some obscure super necromancy spell, that's for what you have advanced learning.


Thing is, after a point you run out of different necromancy effects... sure you may have 5 or 6 different spells that inflict a particular ailment but thats not really any better than having one that does it.

oslecamo

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1940
Re: What Would It Take For Non-Casters To Be On Par With Casters?
« Reply #24 on: October 07, 2011, 08:43:07 AM »
Thing is, after a point you run out of different necromancy effects... sure you may have 5 or 6 different spells that inflict a particular ailment but thats not really any better than having one that does it.

For one, it encourages the dread necromancer to bring a pile of books to the table and spend extra time looking for that specific necromancy spell that's more apropriate to the specific situation every round, slugging down the game for everybody else.

For other, here and there on splatbooks there's obscure necromancy spells that allow things normally not associated with necromancy (like dominating the living, which should be an enchanter's stick).

So by allowing full spontaneous acess to necromancy, you're vastly increasing the dread necromancer's power by giving it effects it would normally have acess to, while slugging down the game for everybody else. Two wrongs definetely don't make a good in this case.

If you really want to encourage splatbook diving like there's no tomorrow, at least limit it to dread necromancer swaping spells from his known list every level up, so at least the total number of spells known remains stable and it's easier for the DM to make sure he doesn't try to sneak in some borked necromancy spell from some obscure splatbook or something like that. It works for the sorcerer.

RobbyPants

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 7139
Re: What Would It Take For Non-Casters To Be On Par With Casters?
« Reply #25 on: October 07, 2011, 10:57:52 AM »
  • Restrict casters thematically.  I'd be happy if they all got turned into something in the middle ground between a Dread Necromancer and a Sorcerer.  Sorcs agonize too much about their particular spell choices (annoying), but there aren't enough Dread Necro type classes to go around.  But, something along those lines, that way 1 spellcaster can't be all things to all situations.
I've liked this idea for a while. A big help would be to create three or four more similar classes, pay close attention to their spell list, and quick patch any bad spells. This is probably the easiest way I can think of to bring casters down in that they lose some of their flexibility, and it's a lot easier to watch for broken combos.


Along this idea, how about making the dread necro list contain every necromancy spell?

No. What makes the dread necro and pals relatively balanced it's precisely that they automatically don't know dozens of spels per level.

If you want some obscure super necromancy spell, that's for what you have advanced learning.
I agree that this would kill most of the point of forcing specialization. Careful monitoring of spell lists is what makes those classes work better. IMO, Advanced Learning is still a problem. It could be fixed by providing a list of axillary spells, so that no broken ones get taken. Any others can be taken at the DM's discretion, but that gets risky.
My balancing 3.5 compendium
Elemental mage test game

Quotes
[spoiler]
Quote from: Cafiend
It is a shame stupidity isn't painful.
Quote from: StormKnight
Totally true.  Historians believe that most past civilizations would have endured for centuries longer if they had successfully determined Batman's alignment.
Quote from: Grand Theft Otto
Why are so many posts on the board the equivalent of " Dear Dr. Crotch, I keep punching myself in the crotch, and my groin hurts... what should I do? How can I make my groin stop hurting?"
Quote from: CryoSilver
I suggest carving "Don't be a dick" into him with a knife.  A dull, rusty knife.  A dull, rusty, bent, flaming knife.
Quote from: Seerow
Fluffy: It's over Steve! I've got the high ground!
Steve: You underestimate my power!
Fluffy: Don't try it, Steve!
Steve: *charges*
Fluffy: *three critical strikes*
Steve: ****
Quote from: claypigeons
I don't even stat out commoners. Commoner = corpse that just isn't a zombie. Yet.
Quote from: CryoSilver
When I think "Old Testament Boots of Peace" I think of a paladin curb-stomping an orc and screaming "Your death brings peace to this land!"
Quote from: Orville_Oaksong
Buy a small country. Or Pelor. Both are good investments.
[/spoiler]

Lycanthromancer

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4003
    • Email
Re: What Would It Take For Non-Casters To Be On Par With Casters?
« Reply #26 on: October 07, 2011, 04:04:04 PM »
It works for the sorcerer.
No, it really doesn't...
[spoiler]Masculine men like masculine things. Masculine men are masculine. Therefore, liking masculine men is masculine.

I dare anyone to find a hole in that logic.
______________________________________
[/spoiler]I'm a writer. These are my stories. Some are even SFW! (Warning: Mostly Gay.)
My awesome poster collection. (Warning, some are NSFW.)
Agita's awesome poster collection.
[spoiler]
+1 Lycanthromancer
Which book is Lycanthromancer in?
Lyca ... is in the book. Yes he is.
 :D
shit.. concerning psionics optimization, lycan IS the book
[/spoiler]

veekie

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 9034
  • WARNING: Homing Miko
Re: What Would It Take For Non-Casters To Be On Par With Casters?
« Reply #27 on: October 07, 2011, 04:13:21 PM »
I don't know if the spell system needs an overhaul.  Again, I don't think there's a huge issue, but that's also b/c I am willing and able to engage in serious optimization to make my non-casters work out.
One thing is the resource mechanic to begin with really. With how spell slots work, each level adds a new array of options, but the earlier slots are all still there, and for the best spells, they do not grow significantly obsolete. Using your newer spells do not hinder your ability to pull an early nuke out of your pocket, nor does using the low level spells in bulk do anything about your general energy.

Either you do what they were trying ham handedly with the spell CL caps, or you can merge and streamline the magic mechanic.
The mind transcends the body.
It's also a little cold because of that.
Please get it a blanket.

I wish I could read your mind,
I can barely read mine.

"Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th. At 2:15, it begins rolling up characters."

[spoiler]
"Just what do you think the moon up in the sky is? Everyone sees that big, round shiny thing and thinks there must be something round up there, right? That's just silly. The truth is much more awesome than that. You can almost never see the real Moon, and its appearance is death to humans. You can only see the Moon when it's reflected in things. And the things it reflects in, like water or glass, can all be broken, right? Since the moon you see in the sky is just being reflected in the heavens, if you tear open the heavens it's easy to break it~"
-Ibuki Suika, on overkill

To sumbolaion diakoneto moi, basilisk ouranionon.
Epigenentheto, apoleia keraune hos timeis pteirei.
Hekatonkatis kai khiliakis astrapsato.
Khiliarkhou Astrape!
[/spoiler]

There is no higher price than 'free'.

"I won't die. I've been ordered not to die."

Sinfire Titan

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 5697
  • You've got one round to give a rat's ass.
    • Email
Re: What Would It Take For Non-Casters To Be On Par With Casters?
« Reply #28 on: October 07, 2011, 04:25:56 PM »
One thing I've been thinking about with Clerics is turning them into a Vanican Ardent.

Basically, remove their access to any Divine spell that isn't a part of a Domain, and then let them choose an additional domain every few levels. Then redesign the domains so they don't suck as much, but aren't capable of ruining the campaign.


[spoiler][/spoiler]

oslecamo

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1940
Re: What Would It Take For Non-Casters To Be On Par With Casters?
« Reply #29 on: October 07, 2011, 04:40:52 PM »
Basically, remove their access to any Divine spell that isn't a part of a Domain, and then let them choose an additional domain every few levels. Then redesign the domains so they don't suck as much, but aren't capable of ruining the campaign.

I've seen at least two other homebrew projects that run on that basic idea, and I personally quite like it (even used it to one of my monster classes). It makes sense and it's easy to implement.

Actualy, anything that removes automatic acess to an ever-growing list of abilities is a good idea. It's what the most borked spells (polymorph-type, calling-type) have in common. They allow you to cherry pick from a massive list that just gets bigger with every new source of material.

Eldritch_Lord

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 31
Re: What Would It Take For Non-Casters To Be On Par With Casters?
« Reply #30 on: October 07, 2011, 06:20:53 PM »
The domains-as-cleric-spell-lists idea is a good one; 2e's spheres basically worked the same way, and it did a good job of differentiating divine casters.

For arcane casters, maybe you could take a page out of the ToB and give spells prerequisites.  The point has been made before that maneuvers and feats require a bunch of prereqs while a non-evoker can pick up meteor swarm despite never having cast a fire spell before, so why not change that?  Spells would require a certain number of other spells of the same type/theme/descriptor based on their level and potency, so fireball might require 1 other [Fire] spell or 2 other Evocations, for instance, while finger of death might require X [Death] spells of level A or higher plus Y other Necromancy of level B or higher or the like.  The main complaint about ToB prereqs is that they make building higher-level adepts more complex, but that's mostly from the IL mechanic, I think; it shouldn't add too much complexity to a wizard.

Sinfire Titan

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 5697
  • You've got one round to give a rat's ass.
    • Email
Re: What Would It Take For Non-Casters To Be On Par With Casters?
« Reply #31 on: October 07, 2011, 07:00:40 PM »
I kinda wanted to replicate MtG's Splice onto Arcane mechanic for Arcane casters, but that idea is absurdly complex and potentially unbalanced, especially when given to the Big 6.


I may just make a different subsystem for that idea.


[spoiler][/spoiler]

Midnight_v

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2660
  • Dulce et decorum est pro alea mori.
Re: What Would It Take For Non-Casters To Be On Par With Casters?
« Reply #32 on: October 07, 2011, 07:23:34 PM »
Quote
IMO, Advanced Learning is still a problem. It could be fixed by providing a list of axillary spells, so that no broken ones get taken. Any others can be taken at the DM's discretion, but that gets risky.
  In response to that, way I'm seeing it, advanced learning ain't the problem at all. The problem is that there is a "broken spell" at all, so... what spell's are you so afraid of the dread necro getting his hands on in that case?
\\\"Disentegrate.\\\" \\\"Gust of wind.\\\" \\\"Now Can we PLEASE resume saving the world?\\\"

SquishE

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 15
    • Email
Re: What Would It Take For Non-Casters To Be On Par With Casters?
« Reply #33 on: October 07, 2011, 09:04:18 PM »
The domains-as-cleric-spell-lists idea is a good one; 2e's spheres basically worked the same way, and it did a good job of differentiating divine casters.

For arcane casters, maybe you could take a page out of the ToB and give spells prerequisites.  The point has been made before that maneuvers and feats require a bunch of prereqs while a non-evoker can pick up meteor swarm despite never having cast a fire spell before, so why not change that?  Spells would require a certain number of other spells of the same type/theme/descriptor based on their level and potency, so fireball might require 1 other [Fire] spell or 2 other Evocations, for instance, while finger of death might require X [Death] spells of level A or higher plus Y other Necromancy of level B or higher or the like.  The main complaint about ToB prereqs is that they make building higher-level adepts more complex, but that's mostly from the IL mechanic, I think; it shouldn't add too much complexity to a wizard.
Is there a write up about just converting spells into a more psionic-style system? Spell slots to points. Higher level spells require more points to cast...

Anyway, aside from that I was mulling over spells today, and considered making a table for spell potency, and having various levels of potency. Good, Average, Poor... sort of like the BAB table, with values for damage/saves/etc (numbers of forms you can polymorph to?). Wizards would have to pick a favored school... spells from that school would progress along the Average column, with the exception of hand-picked favored spells (possibly even outside of the favored school)... which would all progress along the Good column. Considering those are spells represented as being something the Wizard uses more often, and therefore has a better understanding, and control over. All spells outside of the favored school (or schools?) would progress as poor. Due to the wizard either not using them often, or just not understand that side of the Arcane quite as well.

For spells known, my players have started printing, or writing lists of spells they're likely to use with all the relevant information needed... speeds things up a bit.

I know that's not necessarily a simple change, but thought it may be an interesting twist, and could potentially limit spell lists a bit more.

Unbeliever

  • King Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 766
Re: What Would It Take For Non-Casters To Be On Par With Casters?
« Reply #34 on: October 08, 2011, 02:08:47 AM »
I don't know if the spell system needs an overhaul.  Again, I don't think there's a huge issue, but that's also b/c I am willing and able to engage in serious optimization to make my non-casters work out.
One thing is the resource mechanic to begin with really. With how spell slots work, each level adds a new array of options, but the earlier slots are all still there, and for the best spells, they do not grow significantly obsolete. Using your newer spells do not hinder your ability to pull an early nuke out of your pocket, nor does using the low level spells in bulk do anything about your general energy.

Either you do what they were trying ham handedly with the spell CL caps, or you can merge and streamline the magic mechanic.
I don't think I understand what you're saying here.  My point was that I can build non-spellcasting characters that can readily compete with pretty heavily optimized spellcasting ones.  I'm not saying it's easy or it isn't a lot of work, it just so happens that I (and really I mean to include everyone in the 3 groups I regularly play with) are used to doing that anyway.  So, the game balance concern isn't as dire to me, in effect, as they are by just reading the rules.  That's due to some combination of gentleman's agreement and optimization.

That being said, lower level spells should become less effective as you go up in levels.  Generally, a 1st level spell is "supposed to" be a less impressive use of your limited combat actions than a 5th level spell.  That's not to say you won't find reasons to cast your 1st level ones -- sometimes that's the effect you're really looking for and the closest thing you have memorized is a low level spell.  Or, sometimes the extra oomph from the higher level just isn't worth it:  a lot of higher level spells do the same damage as lower level ones, but to multiple targets, and if there aren't those targets handy then you'll opt for the lower level spell.

Now, I said "supposed to" b/c naturally there are some spells that are just really good regardless.  I think these might be overstated.  Grease is probably a great example, but even then it does get less useful:  at higher levels more opponents can fly or teleport or just have high enough Dex scores to make the Balance check untrained.  Solid Fog might be another good example along these lines -- it doesn't lose much effectiveness as the game wears on.  Although it's also a reasonably high level spell (4th), so I'm less discomfited by it.

That being said, to the extent that a spell doesn't lose much in the way of effectiveness as the game progresses, that might be an indication that it is "broken," and should probably be changed or excised (in this I am again in agreement with Midnight_v's post a few ones up). 

One final thing directly addressing the question:  you need multiple encounters before "resting."  Without a lot of encounters, spellcasters don't have to manage their resources, and the "I can do this all day" guys are just left in the dust b/c the spellcasters can use their most powerful options all the time.  It would take some work to rebalance things if you essentially get rid of the resource issues for spellcasters.  And, don't jump on me and tell me that a 12th level Wizard will never ever run out of spells.  That's largely true, the question is how many of his 5th and 6th level spells he has to sling for every encounter. 

Sinfire Titan

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 5697
  • You've got one round to give a rat's ass.
    • Email
Re: What Would It Take For Non-Casters To Be On Par With Casters?
« Reply #35 on: October 08, 2011, 09:12:09 AM »
My point was that I can build non-spellcasting characters that can readily compete with pretty heavily optimized spellcasting ones.

I'm more concerned with the Story-breaking abilities than I am with combat efficacy. Noncasters can't compete with Resurrection, Wish, Genesis, Teleport, Plane Shift, etc. I'm fine with spellcasters being able to lockdown encounters (and I encourage similar optimization from my noncasters), but I dislike it when a reasonably thought-out storyline gets ended prematurely because of a minor oversight in character creation on my part. Being able to go Tippyverse is fine in moderation, but stuff like Dominating an entire plane is outright wrong.

That's the first thing I would fix.


[spoiler][/spoiler]

Unbeliever

  • King Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 766
Re: What Would It Take For Non-Casters To Be On Par With Casters?
« Reply #36 on: October 08, 2011, 12:44:43 PM »
^ I can't really argue with this.  In fact, I have been doing it for a long time at this point -- Teleport is usually the only one that is up in the air in my games.  The other ones get moderated, e.g., we confine Resurrect effects to stuff like Revivify, where we can handwaive and say "you weren't really dead, just incapacitated." 

veekie

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 9034
  • WARNING: Homing Miko
Re: What Would It Take For Non-Casters To Be On Par With Casters?
« Reply #37 on: October 08, 2011, 01:04:52 PM »
Quote
One final thing directly addressing the question:  you need multiple encounters before "resting."  Without a lot of encounters, spellcasters don't have to manage their resources, and the "I can do this all day" guys are just left in the dust b/c the spellcasters can use their most powerful options all the time.  It would take some work to rebalance things if you essentially get rid of the resource issues for spellcasters.  And, don't jump on me and tell me that a 12th level Wizard will never ever run out of spells.  That's largely true, the question is how many of his 5th and 6th level spells he has to sling for every encounter. 
Only thing is, the "I can do this all day" guy can't do it all day because his health(his sole resource) depletes faster than spell slots. By the time the 12th level wizard is half down(requiring an epic number of encounters), the single resource types have run out already.

Ultimately, the resource mechanic isn't compatible.

As for planned obsolescence it just plain doesn't work, especially for buffs(because you can raise them without combat actions, and either you assume everyone has them and screw those without them, or you assume nobody does and they have a significant advantage). You'd be much better off dramatically abolishing low level spells entirely for basic spell units, which you can sink spell slots into to make them appropriate to the level.
The mind transcends the body.
It's also a little cold because of that.
Please get it a blanket.

I wish I could read your mind,
I can barely read mine.

"Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th. At 2:15, it begins rolling up characters."

[spoiler]
"Just what do you think the moon up in the sky is? Everyone sees that big, round shiny thing and thinks there must be something round up there, right? That's just silly. The truth is much more awesome than that. You can almost never see the real Moon, and its appearance is death to humans. You can only see the Moon when it's reflected in things. And the things it reflects in, like water or glass, can all be broken, right? Since the moon you see in the sky is just being reflected in the heavens, if you tear open the heavens it's easy to break it~"
-Ibuki Suika, on overkill

To sumbolaion diakoneto moi, basilisk ouranionon.
Epigenentheto, apoleia keraune hos timeis pteirei.
Hekatonkatis kai khiliakis astrapsato.
Khiliarkhou Astrape!
[/spoiler]

There is no higher price than 'free'.

"I won't die. I've been ordered not to die."

Necrosnoop110

  • That monkey with the orange ass cheeks
  • ****
  • Posts: 270
    • Email
Re: What Would It Take For Non-Casters To Be On Par With Casters?
« Reply #38 on: October 08, 2011, 01:50:24 PM »
(Playing Devils Advocate here)

What would you say to someone who claims that ...

1) From in game OBSERVATIONS, casters are only more powerful than non-casters because of "lazy DMs"
2) From in game OBSERVATIONS, casters are only more powerful than non-casters because of "whiny players"
3) The overwhelmingly large majority of caster/non-caster balance can be handled by ace DM-ing and involved PCs
4) The caster/non-caster imbalance only comes about due to theoretical optimization and not in an average game table
5) DMs can even out this potential imbalance by creating challenges and opponents that tax bot casters and non-casters with a little bit of effort 

Basically, the problem of caster/non-caster balance is uncontrolled "theoretical optimization" and lazy DMing.

Thoughts?

Peace,
Necro   

Unbeliever

  • King Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 766
Re: What Would It Take For Non-Casters To Be On Par With Casters?
« Reply #39 on: October 08, 2011, 02:14:18 PM »
Quote
One final thing directly addressing the question:  you need multiple encounters before "resting."  Without a lot of encounters, spellcasters don't have to manage their resources, and the "I can do this all day" guys are just left in the dust b/c the spellcasters can use their most powerful options all the time.  It would take some work to rebalance things if you essentially get rid of the resource issues for spellcasters.  And, don't jump on me and tell me that a 12th level Wizard will never ever run out of spells.  That's largely true, the question is how many of his 5th and 6th level spells he has to sling for every encounter. 
Only thing is, the "I can do this all day" guy can't do it all day because his health(his sole resource) depletes faster than spell slots. By the time the 12th level wizard is half down(requiring an epic number of encounters), the single resource types have run out already.
Unlimited, if slow, healing is tragically cheap and easy to acquire. 


As for planned obsolescence it just plain doesn't work, especially for buffs(because you can raise them without combat actions, and either you assume everyone has them and screw those without them, or you assume nobody does and they have a significant advantage). You'd be much better off dramatically abolishing low level spells entirely for basic spell units, which you can sink spell slots into to make them appropriate to the level.
Huh?  Why do we assume that buffs don't take combat options?  Some last a long time, like Stoneskin, but what 1st-3rd level spells are you referring to in this regard? 

There are, surely, some uber buffs out there -- like Polymorph -- though again a 4th level spell and also the exemplar broken spell.  While casting even a pretty good buff, like Shield, can be handy, as you gain levels, you will find more and more valuable things to do with your actions than that. 

--NA