A fix to the spell system [Archive] - Wizards Community

A fix to the spell system [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Talchar
03-27-05, 08:30 PM Fixing the D&D Magic System

The D&D magic system is a binary system, divided into Arcane & Divine spell divisions. Classification of Arcane and Divine spells is arbitrary and in many cases nonsensical with class archetypes. This arbitrary division, combined with multiple spell casting means and the inclusion of limited access spell casters has combined to create a magic system that is prone to abuse.

Within the each spell division, spells are categorized into spell schools and domains. Neither spell schools or domains have any particular significant game mechanic and serve chiefly as vehicles for applying feats.

Proposed Fix: Unification

The divisions of Arcane & Divine spells should be eliminated in favor of a single system. Access to the combined spell list is to be determined by the characters class access type and class affinity / aversion / anathema spell limitations.

Access Types

Spell School Greater: Access to spell levels 0 to 9 for a particular spell school.
Spell School Lesser: Access to spell levels 0 to 4 for a particular spell school.
Greater Domain Spell: Access to the Domain Granted power & all spells on domain list
Lesser Domain Spell: Access to all spells on domain list.
Core Spell: Access to spells that are limited to your particular class. (Example Holy Sword is a Paladin Core Spell)
Independent Study: Access to any one spell of your choice that is not prohibited by alignment or other factor.

Affinity / Aversion / Anathema

Spells that fit under these terms, have their spell slot level modified, thus representing spells that are easier to use. The modified spell slot cost does not affect the spells effective level with respect, to spell resistance, counter spells, or spell DC. For Affinity spells, you still have to be able to cast the particular spell at its unmodified listing even though the spell would take up a spell slot one level lower then normal.

Affinity: Spells that fit the classification of a character classes Affinity definition are considered one spell level lower then listed. Minimum spell level of 1.

Aversion: Spells that fit the classification of a character classes Aversion definition are considered one spell level higher then listed. Spells that have their spell slot level rating raised to higher then 9 become epic level spells.

Anathema: Spells that fit the classification of a character classes Anathema definition are considered two spell levels higher then listed. Spells that have their spell slot level rating raised to higher then 9 become epic level spells

Access by Character Class Type

Wizard Spell Access
Spell School Greater Access:
Spell School Lesser Access:
Core Access: Wizard
Affinity: Any one Spell School (Specialist Only), Lesser access to one Domain [Not Alignment or Healing domains] (Wizard only)
Aversion: Transmutation (Good/Evil)
Anathema: Conjuration (Healing), Evocation (Good / Evil)

Sorcerer Spell Access
Lesser Domain Access
Independent Study
Core Access: None
Affinity: Any one sub-school from the Evocation, Conjuration, Illusion, or Enchantment schools.
Aversion: Divination, Evocation (Good/Evil)
Anathema: Conjuration (Healing)

Cleric Spell Access
Greater Domain Spell Access
Lesser Domain Spell Access
Core Access: Cleric
Independent Study
Affinity: Conjuration (Healing), Abjuration (Good or Evil)
Aversion: Evocation
Anathema: Evil or Good sub-school spells.

Druid Spell Access
Lesser Domain Spell Access
Independent Study
Core Access: Druid
Affinity: Transmutation
Aversion: Enchantment (Charm)
Anathema: Necromancy
Talchar
03-27-05, 08:30 PM Private Portfolio Clerics

Private Portfolio Clerics represents a merger a merger of 2nd edition “spheres of Influence” and the 3rd edition Domain system. Domains are divided by access level. Relevant access levels are:

1. Greater Access: Cleric has access to all spells listed in the specific domain registry and gains the use of the Domain’s granted power. Only those domains that are part of the cleric’s deity portfolio are eligible to be greater access domains.

2. Lesser Access: Cleric has access to all spells listed in the specific domain registry but does not have access to the Domain granted power. Any domain is eligible to be a lesser access domain, except those domains that are prohibited by alignment.

3. Independent Study Prohibited Access: This access level relates to any spells or spell domains prohibited due to oppositional alignment or descriptor. Affected domains are: Good/Evil, Law/Chaos, Fire/Water, Earth/Air

Spell Access by Character level advancement.

1. Gains Greater Access to one domain at levels 1st, 7th, 13th, & 19th.
2. Gain Lesser Access to (4) Domains at 1st level & +1 Lesser Domain at levels 5th, 7th, 10th, 13th,16th& 19th level.
3. Independent Study: At 1st level and for each level there after gained, you can select any two non-prohibited clerical spells, to add to your spells accessible list.
CMorton
03-27-05, 08:44 PM Seems similar to Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed books, if somewhat more complex.

It's an interesting idea, and appears well thought out, but probably not really the cup of tea to many players, if not too complex for beginners.

But, nice presentation anyway.

Gold star!!!!
Seeker95
03-27-05, 09:30 PM When unification leads to more complexity, it is not a fix.

Talchar, your heart is in the right place when you experiment with changing Dungeons & Dragons, but you consistently make your "fixes" more difficult, leaving us with less of a "fix" than a "different".

And if different is harder, it is not likely to be viewed as better.
Talchar
03-27-05, 10:03 PM Ah well,

Its but a thought device. As for complexity, it incorporates processes already used in the game and just expands them to cover all spell casters. In effect, each caster would have their own "spell list".

The domains are direct decendant of the old Spheres of influence and works like them. The Afinity component is new, but it presupposses that PC's would have access to spell organizer (as the afinity component would only affect a small fraction of available spells).

As for complexity: D&D is about the most complex game around, if you look at it. 300+ classes, 300+ feats, 1000's of spells, and at least 7 variant editions made by various companies.

I suppose my one issue with these boards, is the lack the of proposed solutions, as oppossed dueling debates over the meaning of a phrase or word. Where the ultimate, rejoinder becomes, what you propose is just a "house rule". It is clear, that there are several large holes in the rules, that create structural imballances in the system. It is equally clear that there is a great resistance to change, or non-official ideas, combined with a curious willingness to abide with the will of WOTC.

One day, I'll just have to sit down and do a serious reorgainization and perhapse it will work, or at the very least, it will deprive some spotted owls a nesting spot.
astatine
03-27-05, 11:11 PM The Affinity/Aversion/Anathema assonance (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=assonance) reminds me of the spell paths rules from Crossfire (http://crossfire.real-time.com). Crossfire uses a spell points/spells known system, categorizes spells into schools and paths, and a character may be Attuned, Repelled or Denied any given path. Attuned spells are cast at +4 caster level and -20% casting cost, Repelled spells are cast at -4 caster level and +20% casting cost, and Denied spells simply can't be cast by the character. Of course, nothing stops you from using a Repelled or Denied spell from a magic item.
Talchar
03-28-05, 02:40 AM The Affinity/Aversion/Anathema assonance (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=assonance) reminds me of the spell paths rules from Crossfire (http://crossfire.real-time.com). Crossfire uses a spell points/spells known system, categorizes spells into schools and paths, and a character may be Attuned, Repelled or Denied any given path. Attuned spells are cast at +4 caster level and -20% casting cost, Repelled spells are cast at -4 caster level and +20% casting cost, and Denied spells simply can't be cast by the character. Of course, nothing stops you from using a Repelled or Denied spell from a magic item.

Just skimmed the Crossfire page. There are some interesting ideas , I 'll have to look a tad closer at that system.
Seeker95
03-28-05, 08:45 PM Talchar,

Although my responses to your "fix" threads tend to be oppositional in nature, this is more reflective of my "keep it simple" approach to the game. I use Core Rules only. I don't use Prestige Classes. I have, in my current campaign, a total of three house rules. If D&D were made my way, there would only be four classes, with everything else shaped by Feat, Skill, and Equipment selections, plus player-defined flavor.

That said, I also don't think you should stop your tinkering. I suspect your proposed changes would never find their way into my game, but reading them still gives me an occasional idea, and an even greater appreciation of the status quo in its uniquely "complex simplicity". Between these two benefits, I see ample justification for your proposals, even if they never reach implementation.
Talchar
03-28-05, 09:49 PM Talchar,

Although my responses to your "fix" threads tend to be oppositional in nature, this is more reflective of my "keep it simple" approach to the game. I use Core Rules only. I don't use Prestige Classes. I have, in my current campaign, a total of three house rules. If D&D were made my way, there would only be four classes, with everything else shaped by Feat, Skill, and Equipment selections, plus player-defined flavor.

That said, I also don't think you should stop your tinkering. I suspect your proposed changes would never find their way into my game, but reading them still gives me an occasional idea, and an even greater appreciation of the status quo in its uniquely "complex simplicity". Between these two benefits, I see ample justification for your proposals, even if they never reach implementation.

You do have an interesting point of view and for the most part, I tend to agree with most of your positions. I am curious on the why's of issues. I fyou can understand the why, then you can develope a solution. Case in point, you desire for the 4 classes + concept. I would take a wild guess at the answer," stability & integration"

Stability in that you would not have to be familar with book that rules on the subject, written clearly on xyz sub paragraph X, that details my class of uber greatness. Thus you could actually plan an adventure while having a reasonable idea what your PC's can do.

Intergration: One of my pet peaves, is with ability creep. Each new book tops the prior book. So in many ways, it is easier to just say no.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Talchar 03-27-05, 08:30 PM	Fixing the D&D Magic System The D&D magic system is a binary system, divided into Arcane & Divine spell divisions. Classification of Arcane and Divine spells is arbitrary and in many cases nonsensical with class archetypes. This arbitrary division, combined with multiple spell casting means and the inclusion of limited access spell casters has combined to create a magic system that is prone to abuse. Within the each spell division, spells are categorized into spell schools and domains. Neither spell schools or domains have any particular significant game mechanic and serve chiefly as vehicles for applying feats. Proposed Fix: Unification The divisions of Arcane & Divine spells should be eliminated in favor of a single system. Access to the combined spell list is to be determined by the characters class access type and class affinity / aversion / anathema spell limitations. Access Types Spell School Greater: Access to spell levels 0 to 9 for a particular spell school. Spell School Lesser: Access to spell levels 0 to 4 for a particular spell school. Greater Domain Spell: Access to the Domain Granted power & all spells on domain list Lesser Domain Spell: Access to all spells on domain list. Core Spell: Access to spells that are limited to your particular class. (Example Holy Sword is a Paladin Core Spell) Independent Study: Access to any one spell of your choice that is not prohibited by alignment or other factor. Affinity / Aversion / Anathema Spells that fit under these terms, have their spell slot level modified, thus representing spells that are easier to use. The modified spell slot cost does not affect the spells effective level with respect, to spell resistance, counter spells, or spell DC. For Affinity spells, you still have to be able to cast the particular spell at its unmodified listing even though the spell would take up a spell slot one level lower then normal. Affinity: Spells that fit the classification of a character classes Affinity definition are considered one spell level lower then listed. Minimum spell level of 1. Aversion: Spells that fit the classification of a character classes Aversion definition are considered one spell level higher then listed. Spells that have their spell slot level rating raised to higher then 9 become epic level spells. Anathema: Spells that fit the classification of a character classes Anathema definition are considered two spell levels higher then listed. Spells that have their spell slot level rating raised to higher then 9 become epic level spells Access by Character Class Type Wizard Spell Access Spell School Greater Access: Spell School Lesser Access: Core Access: Wizard Affinity: Any one Spell School (Specialist Only), Lesser access to one Domain [Not Alignment or Healing domains] (Wizard only) Aversion: Transmutation (Good/Evil) Anathema: Conjuration (Healing), Evocation (Good / Evil) Sorcerer Spell Access Lesser Domain Access Independent Study Core Access: None Affinity: Any one sub-school from the Evocation, Conjuration, Illusion, or Enchantment schools. Aversion: Divination, Evocation (Good/Evil) Anathema: Conjuration (Healing) Cleric Spell Access Greater Domain Spell Access Lesser Domain Spell Access Core Access: Cleric Independent Study Affinity: Conjuration (Healing), Abjuration (Good or Evil) Aversion: Evocation Anathema: Evil or Good sub-school spells. Druid Spell Access Lesser Domain Spell Access Independent Study Core Access: Druid Affinity: Transmutation Aversion: Enchantment (Charm) Anathema: Necromancy
Talchar 03-27-05, 08:30 PM	Private Portfolio Clerics Private Portfolio Clerics represents a merger a merger of 2nd edition “spheres of Influence” and the 3rd edition Domain system. Domains are divided by access level. Relevant access levels are: 1. Greater Access: Cleric has access to all spells listed in the specific domain registry and gains the use of the Domain’s granted power. Only those domains that are part of the cleric’s deity portfolio are eligible to be greater access domains. 2. Lesser Access: Cleric has access to all spells listed in the specific domain registry but does not have access to the Domain granted power. Any domain is eligible to be a lesser access domain, except those domains that are prohibited by alignment. 3. Independent Study Prohibited Access: This access level relates to any spells or spell domains prohibited due to oppositional alignment or descriptor. Affected domains are: Good/Evil, Law/Chaos, Fire/Water, Earth/Air Spell Access by Character level advancement. 1. Gains Greater Access to one domain at levels 1st, 7th, 13th, & 19th. 2. Gain Lesser Access to (4) Domains at 1st level & +1 Lesser Domain at levels 5th, 7th, 10th, 13th,16th& 19th level. 3. Independent Study: At 1st level and for each level there after gained, you can select any two non-prohibited clerical spells, to add to your spells accessible list.
CMorton 03-27-05, 08:44 PM	Seems similar to Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed books, if somewhat more complex. It's an interesting idea, and appears well thought out, but probably not really the cup of tea to many players, if not too complex for beginners. But, nice presentation anyway. Gold star!!!!
Seeker95 03-27-05, 09:30 PM	When unification leads to more complexity, it is not a fix. Talchar, your heart is in the right place when you experiment with changing Dungeons & Dragons, but you consistently make your "fixes" more difficult, leaving us with less of a "fix" than a "different". And if different is harder, it is not likely to be viewed as better.
Talchar 03-27-05, 10:03 PM	Ah well, Its but a thought device. As for complexity, it incorporates processes already used in the game and just expands them to cover all spell casters. In effect, each caster would have their own "spell list". The domains are direct decendant of the old Spheres of influence and works like them. The Afinity component is new, but it presupposses that PC's would have access to spell organizer (as the afinity component would only affect a small fraction of available spells). As for complexity: D&D is about the most complex game around, if you look at it. 300+ classes, 300+ feats, 1000's of spells, and at least 7 variant editions made by various companies. I suppose my one issue with these boards, is the lack the of proposed solutions, as oppossed dueling debates over the meaning of a phrase or word. Where the ultimate, rejoinder becomes, what you propose is just a "house rule". It is clear, that there are several large holes in the rules, that create structural imballances in the system. It is equally clear that there is a great resistance to change, or non-official ideas, combined with a curious willingness to abide with the will of WOTC. One day, I'll just have to sit down and do a serious reorgainization and perhapse it will work, or at the very least, it will deprive some spotted owls a nesting spot.
astatine 03-27-05, 11:11 PM	The Affinity/Aversion/Anathema assonance (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=assonance) reminds me of the spell paths rules from Crossfire (http://crossfire.real-time.com). Crossfire uses a spell points/spells known system, categorizes spells into schools and paths, and a character may be Attuned, Repelled or Denied any given path. Attuned spells are cast at +4 caster level and -20% casting cost, Repelled spells are cast at -4 caster level and +20% casting cost, and Denied spells simply can't be cast by the character. Of course, nothing stops you from using a Repelled or Denied spell from a magic item.
Talchar 03-28-05, 02:40 AM	The Affinity/Aversion/Anathema assonance (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=assonance) reminds me of the spell paths rules from Crossfire (http://crossfire.real-time.com). Crossfire uses a spell points/spells known system, categorizes spells into schools and paths, and a character may be Attuned, Repelled or Denied any given path. Attuned spells are cast at +4 caster level and -20% casting cost, Repelled spells are cast at -4 caster level and +20% casting cost, and Denied spells simply can't be cast by the character. Of course, nothing stops you from using a Repelled or Denied spell from a magic item. Just skimmed the Crossfire page. There are some interesting ideas , I 'll have to look a tad closer at that system.
Seeker95 03-28-05, 08:45 PM	Talchar, Although my responses to your "fix" threads tend to be oppositional in nature, this is more reflective of my "keep it simple" approach to the game. I use Core Rules only. I don't use Prestige Classes. I have, in my current campaign, a total of three house rules. If D&D were made my way, there would only be four classes, with everything else shaped by Feat, Skill, and Equipment selections, plus player-defined flavor. That said, I also don't think you should stop your tinkering. I suspect your proposed changes would never find their way into my game, but reading them still gives me an occasional idea, and an even greater appreciation of the status quo in its uniquely "complex simplicity". Between these two benefits, I see ample justification for your proposals, even if they never reach implementation.
Talchar 03-28-05, 09:49 PM	Talchar, Although my responses to your "fix" threads tend to be oppositional in nature, this is more reflective of my "keep it simple" approach to the game. I use Core Rules only. I don't use Prestige Classes. I have, in my current campaign, a total of three house rules. If D&D were made my way, there would only be four classes, with everything else shaped by Feat, Skill, and Equipment selections, plus player-defined flavor. That said, I also don't think you should stop your tinkering. I suspect your proposed changes would never find their way into my game, but reading them still gives me an occasional idea, and an even greater appreciation of the status quo in its uniquely "complex simplicity". Between these two benefits, I see ample justification for your proposals, even if they never reach implementation. You do have an interesting point of view and for the most part, I tend to agree with most of your positions. I am curious on the why's of issues. I fyou can understand the why, then you can develope a solution. Case in point, you desire for the 4 classes + concept. I would take a wild guess at the answer," stability & integration" Stability in that you would not have to be familar with book that rules on the subject, written clearly on xyz sub paragraph X, that details my class of uber greatness. Thus you could actually plan an adventure while having a reasonable idea what your PC's can do. Intergration: One of my pet peaves, is with ability creep. Each new book tops the prior book. So in many ways, it is easier to just say no.