Alternate Spellcasting for more Balance [Archive] - Wizards Community

Alternate Spellcasting for more Balance [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Xeviat-DM
12-21-05, 12:31 PM On idea that came to me recently about spellcasting was this: except for saving throw powers, what does the wizard's intelligence really do to let them cast spells better? Sure, saving throws are a lot for those spells, but it only raises average damage (by reducing the chance that the foes will succeed the save).

Alternately, the fighter, who has their sword all the time, gets great benefit out of their strength score.

Secondarily, I'm somewhat miffed that a wizard never fails at casting unless someone is harrying them and they fail a concentration check. It seems to me that there should be some sort of caster check before firing off a spell.

So my first suggestion is to do just that: add a caster level check before casting a spell:

Casting Check
When a caster attempts to cast a spell, they must perform a casting check (caster level + casting ability score modifier) vs. a DC equal to spell level squared. Failure indicates that the spell slot was waisted, success indicates that the spell is discharged. 20's are not automatic success, and 1's are not automatic failure.

I am aware that this is a direct nerf on casters. Unless there is a simple way to boost the power of casters to take this into account, I probably would not go for it.

My second idea for altering spellcasters is to change the spell damage from just a set number of dice to dice + ability score modifier. Each spell would then effectively be a new weapon for the caster. Perhaps the modifier could be multiplied at certain levels, so it becomes ever more important.

What do you think? Just some musing.
Epicweaver
12-21-05, 01:04 PM Casting Check
When a caster attempts to cast a spell, they must perform a casting check (caster level + casting ability score modifier) vs. a DC equal to spell level squared. Failure indicates that the spell slot was waisted, success indicates that the spell is discharged. 20's are not automatic success, and 1's are not automatic failure.

0 = autocast
1 = autocast
2 = DC4
3 = DC9
4 = DC16
5 = DC25
6 = DC36
7 = DC49
8 = DC64
9 = DC81
9+ = don't even want to consider

I guess it could work, but the formula for the DC would definately need to be more appropriate.

I am aware that this is a direct nerf on casters. Unless there is a simple way to boost the power of casters to take this into account, I probably would not go for it.

My second idea for altering spellcasters is to change the spell damage from just a set number of dice to dice + ability score modifier. Each spell would then effectively be a new weapon for the caster. Perhaps the modifier could be multiplied at certain levels, so it becomes ever more important.

What do you think? Just some musing.

Possibly... but 10d6 +1~5 isn't really a significant improvement on base damage. I disregarded +4 int mod x level being an increased factor... because adding 40 automatic damage on a 10d6 fireball is beyond what I could stomach as a DM. Also consider, that a Fighter doesn't get bonus damage for leveling like a caster does. (+1 damage from every 2 Strength every 8 levels /=/ +1d6 per level)

Casters already do need to roll to hit for ray type spells as well.

The rules, as they stand now, are more for keeping excess math and dice rolling to a minimum... If you wanted to add more of that you'd have to accept the the extra time it would take during combat for casters to do anything.

If you feel casters are casting too easily in your campaigns and not receiving enough longterm benefit, I would consider two options.

1). Force a standard Concentration check for every spell cast. The law of chance will eventually check up to all the casters and fizzle a spell or two. (Might be fun to even through in a set random backfire/misfire chance in their too). This wouldn't necessarily be that bad if everyone was on the ball.

2). Give the DC's a boost. An extra 5~10 damage on a fireball if the evasion classes never get hit is rarely effective. But higher DC's mean more of a chance to get nuked or PK'd. Personally, my house rules include 3.0 versions of Spell Focus and Greater Spell Focus feats (+2/+4 respectively), which I feel help a bit as well.

That's just what I would consider if I was feeling like you've said.
WarColonel
12-21-05, 01:17 PM So mank things...

1. A wizards Intelligence gives him access to spells, period. A wizard needs intelligence at least equal to the spell level + 10. Int also gives him additional spells per day. Why isn't this enough.

2. Your caster check DC's are beyond screwed up. Level 1 check = 1. lvl 3 = 9. lvl 7 = 49. lvl 9 = 81. Not for nothing, but a wizard would need a minimal Int of 92 in order to cast a Level 9 spell, and would have to beat a DC of 0 for level 0 spells. Besides, the idea messes with the consept of magic. A sorcerer has the inate abilities to do magic, wizards spend years studying just to began casting mage hand, and divine spellcasters get it from gods. Why would any of these people not be able to cast. It is their job, what they are trained to do.

3. Don't add ability scores to damage output unless the spell tells you to. Many (most) spells add damage just for being a higher level. A fighter, on the other hand, does not inheriently get fireball and so cannot do such massive damage in that way. What they do get it prof. with powerful weapons, feats to so special ailities and additional damage, a much better attack progression, etc. Yet a wizard, pound for pound, can do much more with a maximized fireball. It requires much less specialization, and so is easier to obtain, as well as haveing a much larger effect than most swords. At low levels, adding Int to damage from a magic missile is insane, because they never miss and should do very little damage. At higher levels, 10d6 and 10d6+4 in the long run does very little.
Millennium
12-21-05, 01:18 PM On idea that came to me recently about spellcasting was this: except for saving throw powers, what does the wizard's intelligence really do to let them cast spells better? Sure, saving throws are a lot for those spells, but it only raises average damage (by reducing the chance that the foes will succeed the save).
What about bonus spell slots, better Spellcraft checks -particularly if you use the common houserule that Spellcraft is tied to whatever ability drives your spellcasting, whether or not that's Intelligence- and bonuses provided through feats such as Spell Mastery?
Secondarily, I'm somewhat miffed that a wizard never fails at casting unless someone is harrying them and they fail a concentration check. It seems to me that there should be some sort of caster check before firing off a spell.
Why?
So my first suggestion is to do just that: add a caster level check before casting a spell:

Casting Check
When a caster attempts to cast a spell, they must perform a casting check (caster level + casting ability score modifier) vs. a DC equal to spell level squared. Failure indicates that the spell slot was waisted, success indicates that the spell is discharged. 20's are not automatic success, and 1's are not automatic failure.
Spell level squared? Under such a system, these would be the DCs for the different spell levels:
----------
0 - 0
1 - 1
2 - 4
3 - 9
4 - 16
5 - 25
6 - 36
7 - 49
8 - 64
9 - 81
----------
With DCs like that, 7th-level spells will be just barely within reach of a 20th-level caster, and anything higher isn't going to be practical until well into the epic levels. Are you really sure you want to do that?
I am aware that this is a direct nerf on casters. Unless there is a simple way to boost the power of casters to take this into account, I probably would not go for it.
There are plenty of ways to boost casters' powers, but that's one heck of a nerf: I'm not sure you could easily boost casters enough to compensate for that.
RaspK FOG
12-21-05, 08:30 PM Check out Codex Mysterium... :twocents:
MageDance
12-21-05, 11:23 PM Spell level squared?! Damn... That is big DC!! :P :D
Xeviat-DM
12-22-05, 12:50 AM I'm thinking that I made a typo ... a rather big one. I'm looking for an easy way to make a number closer to spell level x2 minus 1 (1, 3, 5) plus 10.

I'll go check that alternate system right now.

Again, this was just an idea to toss out. The fighter can get 1.5 times their strength damage, and a slew of other bonuses, but the wizard's is entirely up to their level. The fact that a high level wizard will have somewhere around 8-12 spells that do nearly their level-d6 damage (which is 3.5xlevel on average) doesn't stack up to what a non-tweaked out warrior can do. Sure, one could say that casters have a resource they have to deal with (spell slots), but when you only fight 4 or so encounters per day ...

It's compounded by instant kill spells. Between Fort save or Die spells and Will save or Die spells, you have enough to take out almost any non-Druid/Cleric/Paladin character.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Xeviat-DM 12-21-05, 12:31 PM	On idea that came to me recently about spellcasting was this: except for saving throw powers, what does the wizard's intelligence really do to let them cast spells better? Sure, saving throws are a lot for those spells, but it only raises average damage (by reducing the chance that the foes will succeed the save). Alternately, the fighter, who has their sword all the time, gets great benefit out of their strength score. Secondarily, I'm somewhat miffed that a wizard never fails at casting unless someone is harrying them and they fail a concentration check. It seems to me that there should be some sort of caster check before firing off a spell. So my first suggestion is to do just that: add a caster level check before casting a spell: Casting Check When a caster attempts to cast a spell, they must perform a casting check (caster level + casting ability score modifier) vs. a DC equal to spell level squared. Failure indicates that the spell slot was waisted, success indicates that the spell is discharged. 20's are not automatic success, and 1's are not automatic failure. I am aware that this is a direct nerf on casters. Unless there is a simple way to boost the power of casters to take this into account, I probably would not go for it. My second idea for altering spellcasters is to change the spell damage from just a set number of dice to dice + ability score modifier. Each spell would then effectively be a new weapon for the caster. Perhaps the modifier could be multiplied at certain levels, so it becomes ever more important. What do you think? Just some musing.
Epicweaver 12-21-05, 01:04 PM	Casting Check When a caster attempts to cast a spell, they must perform a casting check (caster level + casting ability score modifier) vs. a DC equal to spell level squared. Failure indicates that the spell slot was waisted, success indicates that the spell is discharged. 20's are not automatic success, and 1's are not automatic failure. 0 = autocast 1 = autocast 2 = DC4 3 = DC9 4 = DC16 5 = DC25 6 = DC36 7 = DC49 8 = DC64 9 = DC81 9+ = don't even want to consider I guess it could work, but the formula for the DC would definately need to be more appropriate. I am aware that this is a direct nerf on casters. Unless there is a simple way to boost the power of casters to take this into account, I probably would not go for it. My second idea for altering spellcasters is to change the spell damage from just a set number of dice to dice + ability score modifier. Each spell would then effectively be a new weapon for the caster. Perhaps the modifier could be multiplied at certain levels, so it becomes ever more important. What do you think? Just some musing. Possibly... but 10d6 +1~5 isn't really a significant improvement on base damage. I disregarded +4 int mod x level being an increased factor... because adding 40 automatic damage on a 10d6 fireball is beyond what I could stomach as a DM. Also consider, that a Fighter doesn't get bonus damage for leveling like a caster does. (+1 damage from every 2 Strength every 8 levels /=/ +1d6 per level) Casters already do need to roll to hit for ray type spells as well. The rules, as they stand now, are more for keeping excess math and dice rolling to a minimum... If you wanted to add more of that you'd have to accept the the extra time it would take during combat for casters to do anything. If you feel casters are casting too easily in your campaigns and not receiving enough longterm benefit, I would consider two options. 1). Force a standard Concentration check for every spell cast. The law of chance will eventually check up to all the casters and fizzle a spell or two. (Might be fun to even through in a set random backfire/misfire chance in their too). This wouldn't necessarily be that bad if everyone was on the ball. 2). Give the DC's a boost. An extra 5~10 damage on a fireball if the evasion classes never get hit is rarely effective. But higher DC's mean more of a chance to get nuked or PK'd. Personally, my house rules include 3.0 versions of Spell Focus and Greater Spell Focus feats (+2/+4 respectively), which I feel help a bit as well. That's just what I would consider if I was feeling like you've said.
WarColonel 12-21-05, 01:17 PM	So mank things... 1. A wizards Intelligence gives him access to spells, period. A wizard needs intelligence at least equal to the spell level + 10. Int also gives him additional spells per day. Why isn't this enough. 2. Your caster check DC's are beyond screwed up. Level 1 check = 1. lvl 3 = 9. lvl 7 = 49. lvl 9 = 81. Not for nothing, but a wizard would need a minimal Int of 92 in order to cast a Level 9 spell, and would have to beat a DC of 0 for level 0 spells. Besides, the idea messes with the consept of magic. A sorcerer has the inate abilities to do magic, wizards spend years studying just to began casting mage hand, and divine spellcasters get it from gods. Why would any of these people not be able to cast. It is their job, what they are trained to do. 3. Don't add ability scores to damage output unless the spell tells you to. Many (most) spells add damage just for being a higher level. A fighter, on the other hand, does not inheriently get fireball and so cannot do such massive damage in that way. What they do get it prof. with powerful weapons, feats to so special ailities and additional damage, a much better attack progression, etc. Yet a wizard, pound for pound, can do much more with a maximized fireball. It requires much less specialization, and so is easier to obtain, as well as haveing a much larger effect than most swords. At low levels, adding Int to damage from a magic missile is insane, because they never miss and should do very little damage. At higher levels, 10d6 and 10d6+4 in the long run does very little.
Millennium 12-21-05, 01:18 PM	On idea that came to me recently about spellcasting was this: except for saving throw powers, what does the wizard's intelligence really do to let them cast spells better? Sure, saving throws are a lot for those spells, but it only raises average damage (by reducing the chance that the foes will succeed the save). What about bonus spell slots, better Spellcraft checks -particularly if you use the common houserule that Spellcraft is tied to whatever ability drives your spellcasting, whether or not that's Intelligence- and bonuses provided through feats such as Spell Mastery? Secondarily, I'm somewhat miffed that a wizard never fails at casting unless someone is harrying them and they fail a concentration check. It seems to me that there should be some sort of caster check before firing off a spell. Why? So my first suggestion is to do just that: add a caster level check before casting a spell: Casting Check When a caster attempts to cast a spell, they must perform a casting check (caster level + casting ability score modifier) vs. a DC equal to spell level squared. Failure indicates that the spell slot was waisted, success indicates that the spell is discharged. 20's are not automatic success, and 1's are not automatic failure. Spell level squared? Under such a system, these would be the DCs for the different spell levels: ---------- 0 - 0 1 - 1 2 - 4 3 - 9 4 - 16 5 - 25 6 - 36 7 - 49 8 - 64 9 - 81 ---------- With DCs like that, 7th-level spells will be just barely within reach of a 20th-level caster, and anything higher isn't going to be practical until well into the epic levels. Are you really sure you want to do that? I am aware that this is a direct nerf on casters. Unless there is a simple way to boost the power of casters to take this into account, I probably would not go for it. There are plenty of ways to boost casters' powers, but that's one heck of a nerf: I'm not sure you could easily boost casters enough to compensate for that.
RaspK FOG 12-21-05, 08:30 PM	Check out Codex Mysterium... :twocents:
MageDance 12-21-05, 11:23 PM	Spell level squared?! Damn... That is big DC!! :P :D
Xeviat-DM 12-22-05, 12:50 AM	I'm thinking that I made a typo ... a rather big one. I'm looking for an easy way to make a number closer to spell level x2 minus 1 (1, 3, 5) plus 10. I'll go check that alternate system right now. Again, this was just an idea to toss out. The fighter can get 1.5 times their strength damage, and a slew of other bonuses, but the wizard's is entirely up to their level. The fact that a high level wizard will have somewhere around 8-12 spells that do nearly their level-d6 damage (which is 3.5xlevel on average) doesn't stack up to what a non-tweaked out warrior can do. Sure, one could say that casters have a resource they have to deal with (spell slots), but when you only fight 4 or so encounters per day ... It's compounded by instant kill spells. Between Fort save or Die spells and Will save or Die spells, you have enough to take out almost any non-Druid/Cleric/Paladin character.