Slower Casting Times [Archive] - Wizards Community

Slower Casting Times [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
CharlieRock
02-25-07, 09:35 AM I am going to test using a 'maybe' houserule; slower (Classic D&D style) casting times. Basically when you cast a spell it ends your turn, and next round on your initiative the spell will take effect. Movement will be allowed as long as it was completed before starting to cast a spell. DEX bonus to AC will also be removed while casting.
There will be four phases of this 'test'.
Each phase at a different level of participating characters. Five, ten, fifteen ,twenty.
Each phase will have four battles:
*All casters vs All casters
*All casters vs mixed team
*All casters vs All melee
Each team will be four characters. Suggestions welcome (core only).

The purpose of this is to balance more thoroughly casters to melee classes. There are two kinds of game balance. There is the balance of "I can handle any challenge you can". Not my style. And the balance of "I have a job to do that you can't do." More my style.
Currently I see the fighter class (and a few others of melee types) to be jobless after low level. They aren't needed as much as Clerics, Druids, or Wizards. Hoepfully this will give them a job (protect the spell caster during casting time) that is irreplaceable amongst the other classes. Rogues could attempt this job, (and will be placed into the mix team) but they have another job really (traps).
To any interested:
Results by wednesday the 28th (hopefully nothing else comes up). I will be playing the All-Caster Team. And my Team Captain ,Forrinn ,will be playing the versus Teams. Posted on this thread.
bartleby42
02-25-07, 02:55 PM On the surface this appears to be a quick and easy change, but when you begin to look into deeper mechanics it starts to get a little wacky, here are a couple instances. Also your wording while clear isn't exactly "technical" as such I will attempt to reword in a "techincal" fashion, and point out certaint difficulties.

-In all spell descriptions under casting time, replace all instances of "1 standard action" with "Full round"

-While casting the caster is denied thier dex bonus.

So this just about sums up your rules and brings up a bunch of questions, I will list a few I've thought of.

1. What about spells that have a casting time of Full round or more?
-My assumption is that they will remain unchanged, but will they take longer?

2. What about spells like snake's swiftness, and other swift action spells? Are they now full round actions to cast? If so doesn't that render a good chunck of them completley useless?

3. While casting are you considered to be flat-footed? This is a big one. If so this is a much more major nerf to casters than I belive is intended.

As for the test runs, I feel that you should generate two spell lists for the all-caster team, one that you plan on using against the other casters and one you plan on useing against the melee group, and run two fights against each. It should be important to know how well casters preform in non-idealized situations.

Second as an all melee team that can beat casters (who are not in idealic situations and do not have complete and utter foreknowledge of the intimate details of thier life), each have the Mage slayer feat from CAr:

Fighter 2/Rogue 10/Occult Slayer 5/Battle Trickster 3
Bab: +17
Base saves: F- +10/R- +9/W- +8
Improved Evasion
Feats-Exotic Wep Prof (Spiked chain), Wep Focus (spiked chain), Improved Init, Mage Slayer, Iron Will, Great Fort, Lighting ref, ect....

Monk 20
Bab: +15
Base saves: F- +12/R- +12/W- +12
Improved Evaion, outsider type, other goodies too.

Monk 10/Kensai 10
Bab: +14
Base saves: F-+10/R- +10/W- +14
Feats- Combat Expertise, Wep Focus, Mage Slayer and the rest all go to Save bonuses so that he can increase all his allies saves by his base save before the fight

Hexblade 3(no casting yet)/Rogue 7/Shadowdancer 10
Bab-+15
Base saves: F- +6/R- +14/W- +8

Tactics- The monk/kensai gifts out all of his save, the rest run in and as the Monk and Occult slayer prevent the casters from, well casting, the Shadow dancer hides then sneak attacks them for wonderful amounts of damage.

On a side note, If you want something that non-casters and do and casters can't use more golems and anti-magic zones. Casters are only as overpowered as you allow.
CharlieRock
02-25-07, 09:43 PM 1. What about spells that have a casting time of Full round or more?
-My assumption is that they will remain unchanged, but will they take longer?

2. What about spells like snake's swiftness, and other swift action spells? Are they now full round actions to cast? If so doesn't that render a good chunck of them completley useless?

3. While casting are you considered to be flat-footed? This is a big one. If so this is a much more major nerf to casters than I belive is intended.
1=unchanged so far.
2=I never liked 'swift' actions. They aren't actually in the core books. There are 'free actions', so what purpose was 'swift actions' added for? Seems like some clunky add-on rule to me. May change them to standard actions. May lump them in with the rest of the spells. One non-core class I want to test this with is the duskblade.
3=No, attacks of opportunity still are available. Rogues should still have to flank to sneak attack.

These were standard rules in earlier editions. All the games from those editions where casting time was houseruled faster (as they are in D&D3.5) nobody played fighters because they became significantly weaker. Much as they are in D&D3.5.

Edit: We have already adopted the spell foci rules from Dave Arneson's Blackmoor. This basically gave all wizards the eschew materials feat. Everyone likes those rules. They are colorful, and blend well within the basic rules.
bholdr_mage
02-25-07, 11:10 PM The duskblade is weak. In comparison to the fighter, the duskblade doesn't have a full BaB; and he hits really hard about 6 times a day (ignoring crits). That may be enough...but damage isn't the only thing that should happen in battles. To mess with the duskblade's casting time, since half of his spells are swift anyway, would severely weaken a support character.

Why is he a support character? Because he doesn't do as good of things as a straight fighter or a straight wizard. He's a combo of the ftr/wiz, and a practical mirror image of the warmage (warmage is more spell oriented, where the duskblade is more combat oriented.)

And gee, what about bards? They sucked before, now they can really get their butt kicked by an angry mother cat and her 15 kittens.

Warblades can stand toe to toe with a spellcaster, power wise. It's not an unknown fact that most mages are more powerful at and after 7th level (arguably) than most melee counterparts. This needs to be changed, but I like the exaustion variant in UA that hits the caster hard as they cast spells through the day.

As a fellow Missourian (may even know you) and watching your posts; normally I agree with what you post. This time, I can't say that I do. I do agree that casters need to be toned down; I just don't think this is how to do it.
bartleby42
02-25-07, 11:32 PM These were standard rules in earlier editions.
In much earlier editions. In 2nd ed (AD&D) most spells went off in the same round, your system adds a round "delay" to every spell.

Also in reference to Swift and immediate actions, I resisted at first but found them to be suprisingly useful. Spells that had no real use due to them being reactionary, the best example of this is Feather Fall. Sure once in a great while you know there is a chance you will fall and the spell is used, while it being a swift cast makes it useful and a spell that solves problems for both the PCs and the DM.

As for Fighters being massively overpowered by casters, I don't see that. Sure casters can do a lot, but on a whole casters are only as overpowered as the DMs let them be. Very rarely do fighter builds have anything that can be DMed out with nearly zero effort, (i.e. Scrolls not available, Dieties take personal offense to certiant spells) and can be incredabley effective. Sure Finger of Death can kill with a failed save, but an effectivly min-maxed Rogue can deal over 150 points of damage in a round and not even allow a save!

I leery of any rule that shifts game balence. That being said this rule only nudges it.
CharlieRock
02-26-07, 06:09 PM Second as an all melee team that can beat casters (who are not in idealic situations and do not have complete and utter foreknowledge of the intimate details of thier life), each have the Mage slayer feat from CAr:
I don't have the CAr, but one of my teammates does. He said it only effects arcane casters. While that would be of some significance against the wizard, it likely isn't going to help a lot against divine casters (who will at least be half of the caster team).

Originally posted by bholdr_mage
The duskblade is weak. In comparison to the fighter, the duskblade doesn't have a full BaB; and he hits really hard about 6 times a day (ignoring crits). That may be enough...but damage isn't the only thing that should happen in battles. To mess with the duskblade's casting time, since half of his spells are swift anyway, would severely weaken a support character.

Why is he a support character? Because he doesn't do as good of things as a straight fighter or a straight wizard. He's a combo of the ftr/wiz, and a practical mirror image of the warmage (warmage is more spell oriented, where the duskblade is more combat oriented.)

And gee, what about bards? They sucked before, now they can really get their butt kicked by an angry mother cat and her 15 kittens.

Warblades can stand toe to toe with a spellcaster, power wise. It's not an unknown fact that most mages are more powerful at and after 7th level (arguably) than most melee counterparts. This needs to be changed, but I like the exaustion variant in UA that hits the caster hard as they cast spells through the day.

As a fellow Missourian (may even know you) and watching your posts; normally I agree with what you post. This time, I can't say that I do. I do agree that casters need to be toned down; I just don't think this is how to do it.
The nature of the Duskblade is why I wanted to test this with one. Casting time will hit this class (and others like them) the hardest. One option I also wanted to incluse was making swift action spells into free action spells. I don't have PHB2 with me at the moment. The teammate that was going to roll-up the duskblade has it. One thing for sure, I don't want to enfeeble the support classes. Bard included.
We aren't trying to effect balance in the "I can accomplish the same challenges you can" sense. Just find a job for the fighter to do and enable them to accomplish that job best. We play a lot of mid-size battles (30+ characters). In equal numbers and levels ,there is little need for 'specialized melee classes' (that are a lot more expensive to field ,to boot). Potions and gadgets alleviate one issue while excacerbating another. Without a reason to keep them around they are going the way of the dodo (at least on my side of the map).
Xeviat-DM
02-26-07, 06:14 PM You dont' need to be flat-footed to be sneak attacked; you just need to lose your Dex to AC. Otherwise Feinting wouldn't work, which simply removes your Dex to AC.

I've considered this change before as well, though without the loss of Dex to AC. I wouldn't make standard action spells into full-round spells, though, just have their effects kick in at the start of your next round. This gives time for people to scatter from area affect spells, and I might even through in a "tense up" to help resist mind-affecting effects (if you realize someone is targetting you with a mind-affecting effect, you can give up your actions to gain a +4 bonus on your next Will save, or something to that effect). This also gives the party a chance to break the caster's concentration.

Seems like a reasonable nerf to casters. I'm not sure how it would all play out, but your party might be frustrated with the rule, as it is simply a nerf. Talk to them about your feelings about caster balance.
CharlieRock
02-26-07, 06:18 PM Quote:
These were standard rules in earlier editions.

In much earlier editions. In 2nd ed (AD&D) most spells went off in the same round, your system adds a round "delay" to every spell.

I didn't actually play 2ed. One DM used the Dark Sun setting, but otherwise I missed that train. I played Classic D&D and AD&D(1ed).
I mostly played Cyberpunk2020 ,GURPS ,or Palladium megaverse.

Basically I skipped what was going on in D&D during the 90s.
CharlieRock
02-26-07, 06:27 PM I've considered this change before as well, though without the loss of Dex to AC. I wouldn't make standard action spells into full-round spells, though, just have their effects kick in at the start of your next round.
This is mainly what I am leaning towards.
Seems like a reasonable nerf to casters. I'm not sure how it would all play out, but your party might be frustrated with the rule, as it is simply a nerf. Talk to them about your feelings about caster balance.

That's one reason we are all testing it together. Just as an 'experiment'. We agreed if it made the game any funner it would be added (in some form).
CharlieRock
02-26-07, 06:51 PM (may even know you)
PMd you ;)

Edit:
Change of plans
As one of my teammates pointed out ,'Why are you playing an all caster team to test out a new rule to help integrate fighters and wizards?' So now I am doing various mixed teams. :whatsthis

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
CharlieRock 02-25-07, 09:35 AM	I am going to test using a 'maybe' houserule; slower (Classic D&D style) casting times. Basically when you cast a spell it ends your turn, and next round on your initiative the spell will take effect. Movement will be allowed as long as it was completed before starting to cast a spell. DEX bonus to AC will also be removed while casting. There will be four phases of this 'test'. Each phase at a different level of participating characters. Five, ten, fifteen ,twenty. Each phase will have four battles: All casters vs All casters All casters vs mixed team *All casters vs All melee Each team will be four characters. Suggestions welcome (core only). The purpose of this is to balance more thoroughly casters to melee classes. There are two kinds of game balance. There is the balance of "I can handle any challenge you can". Not my style. And the balance of "I have a job to do that you can't do." More my style. Currently I see the fighter class (and a few others of melee types) to be jobless after low level. They aren't needed as much as Clerics, Druids, or Wizards. Hoepfully this will give them a job (protect the spell caster during casting time) that is irreplaceable amongst the other classes. Rogues could attempt this job, (and will be placed into the mix team) but they have another job really (traps). To any interested: Results by wednesday the 28th (hopefully nothing else comes up). I will be playing the All-Caster Team. And my Team Captain ,Forrinn ,will be playing the versus Teams. Posted on this thread.
bartleby42 02-25-07, 02:55 PM	On the surface this appears to be a quick and easy change, but when you begin to look into deeper mechanics it starts to get a little wacky, here are a couple instances. Also your wording while clear isn't exactly "technical" as such I will attempt to reword in a "techincal" fashion, and point out certaint difficulties. -In all spell descriptions under casting time, replace all instances of "1 standard action" with "Full round" -While casting the caster is denied thier dex bonus. So this just about sums up your rules and brings up a bunch of questions, I will list a few I've thought of. 1. What about spells that have a casting time of Full round or more? -My assumption is that they will remain unchanged, but will they take longer? 2. What about spells like snake's swiftness, and other swift action spells? Are they now full round actions to cast? If so doesn't that render a good chunck of them completley useless? 3. While casting are you considered to be flat-footed? This is a big one. If so this is a much more major nerf to casters than I belive is intended. As for the test runs, I feel that you should generate two spell lists for the all-caster team, one that you plan on using against the other casters and one you plan on useing against the melee group, and run two fights against each. It should be important to know how well casters preform in non-idealized situations. Second as an all melee team that can beat casters (who are not in idealic situations and do not have complete and utter foreknowledge of the intimate details of thier life), each have the Mage slayer feat from CAr: Fighter 2/Rogue 10/Occult Slayer 5/Battle Trickster 3 Bab: +17 Base saves: F- +10/R- +9/W- +8 Improved Evasion Feats-Exotic Wep Prof (Spiked chain), Wep Focus (spiked chain), Improved Init, Mage Slayer, Iron Will, Great Fort, Lighting ref, ect.... Monk 20 Bab: +15 Base saves: F- +12/R- +12/W- +12 Improved Evaion, outsider type, other goodies too. Monk 10/Kensai 10 Bab: +14 Base saves: F-+10/R- +10/W- +14 Feats- Combat Expertise, Wep Focus, Mage Slayer and the rest all go to Save bonuses so that he can increase all his allies saves by his base save before the fight Hexblade 3(no casting yet)/Rogue 7/Shadowdancer 10 Bab-+15 Base saves: F- +6/R- +14/W- +8 Tactics- The monk/kensai gifts out all of his save, the rest run in and as the Monk and Occult slayer prevent the casters from, well casting, the Shadow dancer hides then sneak attacks them for wonderful amounts of damage. On a side note, If you want something that non-casters and do and casters can't use more golems and anti-magic zones. Casters are only as overpowered as you allow.
CharlieRock 02-25-07, 09:43 PM	1. What about spells that have a casting time of Full round or more? -My assumption is that they will remain unchanged, but will they take longer? 2. What about spells like snake's swiftness, and other swift action spells? Are they now full round actions to cast? If so doesn't that render a good chunck of them completley useless? 3. While casting are you considered to be flat-footed? This is a big one. If so this is a much more major nerf to casters than I belive is intended. 1=unchanged so far. 2=I never liked 'swift' actions. They aren't actually in the core books. There are 'free actions', so what purpose was 'swift actions' added for? Seems like some clunky add-on rule to me. May change them to standard actions. May lump them in with the rest of the spells. One non-core class I want to test this with is the duskblade. 3=No, attacks of opportunity still are available. Rogues should still have to flank to sneak attack. These were standard rules in earlier editions. All the games from those editions where casting time was houseruled faster (as they are in D&D3.5) nobody played fighters because they became significantly weaker. Much as they are in D&D3.5. Edit: We have already adopted the spell foci rules from Dave Arneson's Blackmoor. This basically gave all wizards the eschew materials feat. Everyone likes those rules. They are colorful, and blend well within the basic rules.
bholdr_mage 02-25-07, 11:10 PM	The duskblade is weak. In comparison to the fighter, the duskblade doesn't have a full BaB; and he hits really hard about 6 times a day (ignoring crits). That may be enough...but damage isn't the only thing that should happen in battles. To mess with the duskblade's casting time, since half of his spells are swift anyway, would severely weaken a support character. Why is he a support character? Because he doesn't do as good of things as a straight fighter or a straight wizard. He's a combo of the ftr/wiz, and a practical mirror image of the warmage (warmage is more spell oriented, where the duskblade is more combat oriented.) And gee, what about bards? They sucked before, now they can really get their butt kicked by an angry mother cat and her 15 kittens. Warblades can stand toe to toe with a spellcaster, power wise. It's not an unknown fact that most mages are more powerful at and after 7th level (arguably) than most melee counterparts. This needs to be changed, but I like the exaustion variant in UA that hits the caster hard as they cast spells through the day. As a fellow Missourian (may even know you) and watching your posts; normally I agree with what you post. This time, I can't say that I do. I do agree that casters need to be toned down; I just don't think this is how to do it.
bartleby42 02-25-07, 11:32 PM	These were standard rules in earlier editions. In much earlier editions. In 2nd ed (AD&D) most spells went off in the same round, your system adds a round "delay" to every spell. Also in reference to Swift and immediate actions, I resisted at first but found them to be suprisingly useful. Spells that had no real use due to them being reactionary, the best example of this is Feather Fall. Sure once in a great while you know there is a chance you will fall and the spell is used, while it being a swift cast makes it useful and a spell that solves problems for both the PCs and the DM. As for Fighters being massively overpowered by casters, I don't see that. Sure casters can do a lot, but on a whole casters are only as overpowered as the DMs let them be. Very rarely do fighter builds have anything that can be DMed out with nearly zero effort, (i.e. Scrolls not available, Dieties take personal offense to certiant spells) and can be incredabley effective. Sure Finger of Death can kill with a failed save, but an effectivly min-maxed Rogue can deal over 150 points of damage in a round and not even allow a save! I leery of any rule that shifts game balence. That being said this rule only nudges it.
CharlieRock 02-26-07, 06:09 PM	Second as an all melee team that can beat casters (who are not in idealic situations and do not have complete and utter foreknowledge of the intimate details of thier life), each have the Mage slayer feat from CAr: I don't have the CAr, but one of my teammates does. He said it only effects arcane casters. While that would be of some significance against the wizard, it likely isn't going to help a lot against divine casters (who will at least be half of the caster team). Originally posted by bholdr_mage The duskblade is weak. In comparison to the fighter, the duskblade doesn't have a full BaB; and he hits really hard about 6 times a day (ignoring crits). That may be enough...but damage isn't the only thing that should happen in battles. To mess with the duskblade's casting time, since half of his spells are swift anyway, would severely weaken a support character. Why is he a support character? Because he doesn't do as good of things as a straight fighter or a straight wizard. He's a combo of the ftr/wiz, and a practical mirror image of the warmage (warmage is more spell oriented, where the duskblade is more combat oriented.) And gee, what about bards? They sucked before, now they can really get their butt kicked by an angry mother cat and her 15 kittens. Warblades can stand toe to toe with a spellcaster, power wise. It's not an unknown fact that most mages are more powerful at and after 7th level (arguably) than most melee counterparts. This needs to be changed, but I like the exaustion variant in UA that hits the caster hard as they cast spells through the day. As a fellow Missourian (may even know you) and watching your posts; normally I agree with what you post. This time, I can't say that I do. I do agree that casters need to be toned down; I just don't think this is how to do it. The nature of the Duskblade is why I wanted to test this with one. Casting time will hit this class (and others like them) the hardest. One option I also wanted to incluse was making swift action spells into free action spells. I don't have PHB2 with me at the moment. The teammate that was going to roll-up the duskblade has it. One thing for sure, I don't want to enfeeble the support classes. Bard included. We aren't trying to effect balance in the "I can accomplish the same challenges you can" sense. Just find a job for the fighter to do and enable them to accomplish that job best. We play a lot of mid-size battles (30+ characters). In equal numbers and levels ,there is little need for 'specialized melee classes' (that are a lot more expensive to field ,to boot). Potions and gadgets alleviate one issue while excacerbating another. Without a reason to keep them around they are going the way of the dodo (at least on my side of the map).
Xeviat-DM 02-26-07, 06:14 PM	You dont' need to be flat-footed to be sneak attacked; you just need to lose your Dex to AC. Otherwise Feinting wouldn't work, which simply removes your Dex to AC. I've considered this change before as well, though without the loss of Dex to AC. I wouldn't make standard action spells into full-round spells, though, just have their effects kick in at the start of your next round. This gives time for people to scatter from area affect spells, and I might even through in a "tense up" to help resist mind-affecting effects (if you realize someone is targetting you with a mind-affecting effect, you can give up your actions to gain a +4 bonus on your next Will save, or something to that effect). This also gives the party a chance to break the caster's concentration. Seems like a reasonable nerf to casters. I'm not sure how it would all play out, but your party might be frustrated with the rule, as it is simply a nerf. Talk to them about your feelings about caster balance.
CharlieRock 02-26-07, 06:18 PM	Quote: These were standard rules in earlier editions. In much earlier editions. In 2nd ed (AD&D) most spells went off in the same round, your system adds a round "delay" to every spell. I didn't actually play 2ed. One DM used the Dark Sun setting, but otherwise I missed that train. I played Classic D&D and AD&D(1ed). I mostly played Cyberpunk2020 ,GURPS ,or Palladium megaverse. Basically I skipped what was going on in D&D during the 90s.
CharlieRock 02-26-07, 06:27 PM	I've considered this change before as well, though without the loss of Dex to AC. I wouldn't make standard action spells into full-round spells, though, just have their effects kick in at the start of your next round. This is mainly what I am leaning towards. Seems like a reasonable nerf to casters. I'm not sure how it would all play out, but your party might be frustrated with the rule, as it is simply a nerf. Talk to them about your feelings about caster balance. That's one reason we are all testing it together. Just as an 'experiment'. We agreed if it made the game any funner it would be added (in some form).
CharlieRock 02-26-07, 06:51 PM	(may even know you) PMd you ;) Edit: Change of plans As one of my teammates pointed out ,'Why are you playing an all caster team to test out a new rule to help integrate fighters and wizards?' So now I am doing various mixed teams. :whatsthis