Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Elessar 08-01-07, 03:51 PM	**************************************** *************** The Foreword Hi everyone! Currently, in the grand scheme of D&D, my butt is firmly planted in the player's seat. I've DMed in the past, and gotten positive feedback, but a while back I told my players I'd be taking a break from that role. Now, I'm still not ready to re-assume the helm, but I figured it would be best to plan ahead. I have an idea for a campaign kicking around in my brain, and now I'm in the process of making a variant rule system to fit its needs. I'm using this thread as sort of a mini-blog to catalog my progress and maybe get some feedback. If you see me headed in the wrong direction, feel free to help point me in the right one. And if you are interested in borrowing any of the ideas you see here, feel free to go ahead and treat this as if it were OGC (heck I'm not even sure, maybe it's automatically OGC once you post it here on the boards - doesn't matter, I'm not writing anything private here.) The Reasoning Why mess with a perfectly good system? Well, first of all, I wouldn't say D&D was perfect. In fact, every designer interview I've ever read or listened to has said much the contrary. I like it well enough, and I think at it's heart (the steadily beating d20), the D&D system works well. In certain instances. Campaigns in the Forgotten Realms and Eberron, for example, wouldn't be the same without the idiosyncrasies of the rules as written (excluding exploitative readings, rule loopholes, etc.) When I play these campaigns, as I am wont to do, I like to sit down at the gaming table and relax with my good ole' PHB in front of me, confident that whatever lies in store, it's covered in the rules, and it will fit the flavor of the game. However, both of those settings were made with the rules as written clearly in mind. The streets of Eberron are lit with continual flames because the spell continual flame was what Keith Baker decided he was going to work with when he was writing the campaign. I'm not designing my campaign for a corporate contest, however - and I don't feel like limiting myself that way. Besides, what if continual flame doesn't fit with my world? Well, it just so happens that particular spell is fine in this case... so poor example. The point is that many of the sub-systems of D&D - such as how spells are cast, which spells are cast, the class options, stuff-dependent power levels (with stuff that gets better only by replacing it with more stuff) - all don't jive with my current campaign concept. The rules should fit the game you're playing. There's also the matter of my own personal ease of use. I've once heard (I don't remember where) that there are two kinds of memory. Short-term memory is the type used to memorize nitty-gritty details from the recent past. Long-term memory is used to memorize important events and general lessons from your far past. Now, I'm good at the second one and abysmal at the first one. I can remember the general rules of D&D well, but boy am I bad at recalling specific rules and remembering to look out for sneaky little rules (I always forget that elves can check to Spot secret doors without having to call it, I forget the Alertness bonus for familiars being within 5 ft., I often forget the familiars themselves, etc.) As such, I need to take copious notes when I'm the DM, and make industrious use of the rules on my DM screen. I've even though of creating my own custom screen that can hold the info for all the rules I'm particularly hazy on (Grapple, I'm looking at you.) So in that one particular aspect, D&D fails me - because of my bad short-term memory. (As an aside, my test scores from high school and college were graciously high considering my porous memory.) So why not just scrap using D&D altogether? Why try to fit the ugly stepsister in Cinderella's slipper? Why not just use some other ready-made system? Well, because there are parts of D&D that I do like - enough I think to still warrant calling it D&D. For one thing, there will be Dungeons, and those shall be coincidentally home to various Dragons. That's a start, I suppose. For another thing, all the players I know own the PHB, which prevents me from having to explain some new system or reference basic rules out of a printed .pdf rather than a nice shiny book. There's also the familiarity that my potential players have with the system - so that saying "Well it's D&D except for these rules..." is a lot easier for me than saying "Well, it's still d20, but you're going to have to learn everything all over again." I also actually like the combat mechanics, for the most part. There are bumps (like Grapple), but for the most part, I live with them and they don't come up often enough for me to complain. I also like the skill system, with a few little tweaks for personal preference. I like Rich Burlew's variant Diplomacy skill (http://www.giantitp.com/Func0010.html), for instance, but by and large I think skills work the way they should in my campaign. I like the feat system, in fact I'd like to make it the gold standard in my campaign. The mundane equipment statistics are also in keeping with my campaign. For now, these are the things I'd like to keep. Now allow me to explain the notable omissions... The Tall Order So what do I want? What is this "campaign concept" of which I speak? Well, I've already run something like it in the past - this new campaign setting will be a streamlined and retooled version of the old one. It didn't quite work back then, and I think it's because I was trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. Somehow the options players had just didn't fit. The basic premise was, and is, "dark fantasy sword and sandal noir." I also want to add the occasional horror moment to the mix. It's a tall order, I know, just look at the title of this section. You can get a basic idea of what I have in mind by watching the movie Pan's Labyrinth, then watching the movie Gladiator, then imagining they had a baby that grew up, went to high school with The Maltese Falcon and had on-again-off-again relationships with the short story, Call of Cthulhu and her sister, the video game Eternal Darkness, then went to college to become a tabletop RPG. Or, if you don't like labored analogies, here's an excerpt from a handout I have prepared for players: "The world as it exists is a bleak and ambivalent place. The Empire is the only solid institution, and even it is rife with corruption and showing the first signs of crumbling. Your characters will be struggling against random, uncaring fate. If you succeed, you’ll be proving a pessimistic world wrong. If you fail, well… don’t say I didn’t warn you." Magic is a subtle, mysterious, and powerful thing. People know it exists, but don't trust it, as people who consort with witches seem more likely to meet unpleasant fates. Society is a gray illusion of security built on the ashes of the past. But beyond the veil of the twisted forest, underneath the facade of each rural town, and in the byzantine recesses of each city, there are danger and adventure to be found. The heroes of this world are flawed and outnumbered by dark forces, but they are still stoic and capable. Perhaps even capable of providing a glimmer of hope. With this premise and my mnemonic needs in mind, there are a couple of things I require, rules-wise: A different magic system- I've never read any of Jack Vance's books, so I think it's safe to say that he didn't inspire any of this setting. So the only reason I'd use a Vancian magic system is to save myself the work. Since I'm willing to invest the time, I'd prefer to run a magic system that fits my setting's vision of the way things work. For the image of the magic casters in my campaign, I'm thinking of Brom paintings of witches with sacrificial daggers raised high, the seers and soothsayers of the Conan mythology reading their scattered bone portents, the sorceresses Medea and Circe of Greek myth, and perhaps the sort of academic practitioner who reads old prophecies in the stars for cataclysmic omens. This is before the sort of age where you would find a Merlin (at least the Merlin people usually envision) and magic certainly doesn't involve anything so garish as fireballs or lightning bolts. So I'm going to also be trimming and adding to the spell selection to turn the spellcaster into less of a "glass cannon" and into more of a "glass bag of tricks." A different wealth system- I don't really like the idea of characters hoarding enough money around to break the economy, and then turning around and spending it on wands at Boccob's Magic Item Emporium. They should have magic items, but in this setting, as I've already established, magic is rarer than in usual D&D, subtle, and relatively discrete. If your average tradesman was presented with a powerful magic sword, he might be able to tell it was magical, but he wouldn't know what it was worth besides the amount some rich rube might be willing to squander on it, and he sure wouldn't trust that it wasn't cursed. I also don't like the idea that PCs sell the magic items they acquire on the market like that in my setting. It would be like Bilbo selling Sting at a pawn shop - while it may be realistic for something powerful to turn into a commodity, I don't want it to work that way. Magic isn't the type of thing you just give away. Magic is special in this world. In fact, at the risk of sounding repetitive, I'd go so far as to call it mysterious. So I'm going to have to think up some kind of system where magic has a measurable value that is removed from the world's open market (although it might still be able to be sold on the black market), and then adjust the wealth system accordingly. A different class system- Most of the classes don't really fit with my idea. You could make arguments for all of them, but when it comes down to it, I'd rather just have a simple class system that allows for high customization. Therefore, I'm thinking of using a variant of the generic classes variant in the SRD (a variant of a variant because I'll have to rework the Spellcaster class to fit my new magic system.) Variant rules to reflect the flavor of the setting I've already mentioned that I want occasional horror moments, and the overall feel of the world is rather dreary, so I'm going to either use the rules for Taint or the rules for Sanity. I'm leaning toward Taint, frankly because there are less rules for it in the SRD (and simpler is better in my book) and because the bit about doing away with alignment entirely and just using Taint as a substitute appeals to the flavor of my setting. This doesn't really warrant its own bullet since it requires no work, but I'm also going to be doing away with Races entirely. Only humans are playable in this campaign. Magical races exist, but they're mysterious and not for the players to immediately understand and identify with. So that's my basic plan. The following posts, believe it or not, will be a lot less structured that this one. I'm basically going to start with the toughest thing, magic, and work my way down the list, describing my thought process as I go and editing as little as I can (axcept for typos.) This will hopefully form a production diary to help me remember what I've been thinking and how I got to my conclusions. It will also give people an idea of what's going on in my head so that you can steer me straight if I start faltering. I want to implement these rules, but I want them to be balanced, simple, easy for my players to remember, and of course, fun. I'll mark each new post off with asterisks so that it will be easy to pick out changes and progress in the thread. **************************************** ***************
FponkDamn 08-02-07, 04:35 AM	This sounds a LOT like the campaign I'm close to wrapping up after nearly two years. Since I'm about finished, and you're close to starting, maybe some of my experiences would be helpful to you. Here's hoping! I also ran a setting that only had humans. It was wonderful. The players had a great time with their characters, they could immediately identify with any of the NPCs, and judged everyone based on in-game information. There were races, in a sense - Nationality played heavily into the campaign. It was great watching the PCs make their own prejudices based on what happened in the game, rather than just "I'm an elf, so I hate orcs." If you're going to use only Humans, different nationalities or cultural backgrounds are a gold mine of campaign depth. They were the first thing I created for the campaign setting. I also used the Generic Classes variant, and it too was wonderful. The players started as young children, and learning what they wanted to was a great boon to their enjoyment. The players were able to say things such as "I study under the legendary pirate Horatio Winters, learning all I can about his underhanded fighting style" and I didn't have to say "you can't, because fighters don't gain sneak attack." My main insight here - any class abilities that are unusual or cool, such as Rage, Turning, or Wild Shape, give cool names and make them in-game concepts. Anyone in my campaign can theoretically learn to Turn Undead by learning of "The Mage-light of il-Sharan" and characters who can Rage are known as those "Touched by Runethayos". You can have a lot of fun creating cultural mores around class abilities that almost become to your campaign setting what the Force was to Star Wars. And I, as well, altered the magic system considerably. In my setting, there are no divine casters - as there are no gods. Only wizards exist, and though every spell appears on their list, in-world factions of those wizards monopolize many types of spells (healing magic and teleportation magic, in particular, are the sole province of powerful cabals of secretive wizards). Disliking the "per day" limit of spells, I adopted the "spell recharge" variant in Unearthed Arcana, with a subtle yet major thematic change - the spell energy doesn't "recharge" automatically. The recharge time given must be spent in deep rituals, castings of bones, and other arcane activities to restore the ability to cast spells. This gave magic the deep, ritualistic feel I wanted for the campaign, without much inbalancing. Wizards are a mysterious lot, with an almost Masquerade-like society of their own inside normal society, and that feel came across wonderfully. I did have to trim the spell list a little, but many things took care of themselves. Fireball (an example you give) was allowed, though virtually never used - in addition to the fact that such an outright show of overt powert would likely get the Queen's Royal Order after you in a short time, it simply wasn't needed; once you CAN cast a Fireball, and everyone knows it, you find you rarely have to. :) The one spell I found that I absolutely had to get rid of? Enlarge Person. In a world of only humans, where no man has ever seen nor heard of a monster other than a bear, and few know anything of magic, suddenly seeing a 12-foot tall goliath smashing through ranks soldiers would make any hardened battallion break and run. And that's just too much; I don't want 1st level wizards having that sort of power in war! I used the rules for Wealth from the A Game Of Thrones d20 supplement. If you don't own it, the short version is this - characters simply have a "wealth rank" of 0 to 6. 0 means you're counting your coppers. 6 means you're the equivalent to a king in wealth. Each rank details the things you can do at that level (throw parties for the wealthy noble elite, or afford to stay at fine inns at your pleasure, or commit X troops to battle in the King's name, etc.). As long as you have the wealth rank, you can do those things, and you needn't count the coins. Certain actions (a major political campaign, waging a small war, etc.) lower your Wealth rank, either permanently or temporarily. When you create magic items, you can simply do it if your Wealth rank is sufficient (1 for scrolls and potions, 2 for wands, etc. - scale it to the items as you need for your game, based on Item Level, price, or what have you) and my campaign didn't feature much in the way of a "Magic Item Market" so I never had to decide what the "going rates" were. If you want to make magic items available for sale, you can always say that items have a certain Wealth Rank as a prerequisite to buy, but getting one is such a hassle that your Wealth Rank lowers by 1 as a result for a period of a few weeks/months. That way, you can buy items, but not in a silly way. The Wealth Rank system is AMAZING for allowing wealthy D&D characters to exist without breaking the verisimilitude of an in-world economy, and it also works wonders on cutting down the "boring parts" of a game. Players never wonder how much boots cost, and you can get on with the good stuff. After all, this is a game of epic storytelling! On that note, I used both Sanity and Taint in my campaign! (You don't happen to play in New Jersey, do you? We could probably game!) Taint was the major "villain" of the game, the terrible Shadar, the driving force of evil in the campaign setting. The Tainted are the only true monsters of the setting, horrible creatures that result from the worst dark magics that plague the shadows and grim corners of mankind. Really made the concept of "evil" feel visceral and real, and my players loved it. And after dealing with those tainted by grim circumstance throughout the campaign, it really hit home when the players confronted the main villain - someone who had become tainted by choice, for the black power that choice offered. While Taint is detailed in Unearthed Arcana, a much, much better version exists in Heroes of Horror - that book did a phenomenal job of bringing the concept to life. Sanity has played a major part in the campaign, as magic inherently drives men mad. Even seeing magic can break a person's sanity, so Wizards (informally ruled by the council of Archmagi) have an agreement with the Queen - keep magic behind closed doors, obey the rules set by the archmagi, and never use it against the people of the realm. In exchange, Wizards are largely allowed to govern and police themselves, making them not subject to many of the kingdom's laws and giving Wizards the "masquerade" feel I described earlier. How I reflected this mechanically was: Every spell cast costs its level in Sanity. Wizards (as a class feature at level 1) gain Sanity Resistence equal to their Wisdom Modifier (and Iron Will increases it by 1), meaning lower-level wizards can cast simple spells without too much trouble, and they're also more able to deal with normal sanity-shattering things, due to their long exposure to the arcane. But eventually, wizards determined to gain in power gradually cast spells beyong what their mortal minds can contain, and so nearly all high-level wizards are mad. Incidentally, I do make a distinction with the Spellcaster variant generic class. My version are more "wizard-like" and less "Sorcerer-like", in that they have spellbooks, prepare their spells, etc (though the ritual recharge variant makes them feel the way I want). But! My setting does have Sorcerers, and they are among the rarest and most feared of all men. Sorcerers are said to be nearly omnipotent, and those that do not flee from them do their best to kill them on sight. Mechanically: Sorcerers also have the recharge magic variant, but they do not need to perform any rituals - their magic simply returns. They also lose Sanity for casting spells, but gain no Sanity Resistence, so Sorcerers go mad very, very quickly. I also give all Sorcerers the variant ability from Dungeonscape (they can lose spells to prevent damage; this replaces the familiar, which doesn't really jive with Sorcerers as presented in my setting). Wow! This turned out to be longer (and more rambling!) than I intended. Sorry on that point - I'd take the time to edit this and perhaps format it better, but the hour is late. Hopefully it still has some information you can use! I'll keep reading, and wish you the best! - Johnny
Elessar 08-02-07, 03:55 PM	Holy cow, too bad I don't live in New Jersey! Your campaign doesn't sound exactly like mine, but it comes pretty darn close! I mean, I hadn't fooled myself into thinking it was the most original concept in the world, but that is pretty uncanny nonetheless. I'm glad to know it's fun to play; that means it's worth working at this! Your feedback was great, FponkDamn, and it's given me a lot of food for thought. I now feel justified in doing a lot of the things I was already set on doing (like using generic classes, alternate magic system, etc.), and I'm now going to look into some of your solutions that I haven't thought of (namely, checking out A Game of Thrones for that wealth system - while it wasn't what I had in mind per se, I think it might give me ideas to reach my goal.) The one spell I found that I absolutely had to get rid of? Enlarge Person. Agreed. I like Super Mario as much as the next guy, but he's not making appearances in my campaign. While Taint is detailed in Unearthed Arcana, a much, much better version exists in Heroes of Horror - that book did a phenomenal job of bringing the concept to life. Yes, I have Heroes of Horror, and I like the whole depravity/corruption thing. In fact, now that I look at the SRD version, I think I planned on doing a hybrid between the two systems. I like the simplicity of the SRD version, but the Heroes of Horror version is a lot more precise (and frankly less crippling to the players.) Also, one thing in which our campaigns differ is that magic is not necessarily a corrupting influence in my setting. However, in the back of my mind, I was toying with the idea of having spells with the [Evil] descriptor have some mechanical Taint effect (such as gaining depravity). That way, habitual necromancers in my world are the unstable madmen that your Sorcerers are. Regarding, an alternate magic system, I've been thinking (and playtesting) since before my first post. While I'm still not ruling anything out, I think I know where I may be heading with magic. I like the recharge variant, but having to remember the recharge times of various spells is just not going to work for this DM (my memory is crap for things like that.) So, without further ado- asterisks.... (asterixes?) **************************************** **************** When I first started thinking about what sort of magic system I'd be using, I wanted something that was quick and easy to remember, and something that addressed a quirky problem with D&D - characters are at their most powerful at the beginning of the day, and get substantially less powerful as the day wears on. This problem was brought up in the latest D&D podcast, and I think it's important, flavor-wise. It limits the DM to a story pacing in which spellcasters are only going to be fighting in top form when they've just rested. If the PCs have to fight their way all the way to the lich's chamber, the DM has to make sure the spellcasters are going to have enough juice to finish him off after fighting through waves of minions by not having too many minions. But I want to be able to throw crazy stuff at the PCs and then, when they reach their climactic encounters, the only nasty surprises will be those planned by the villain, not "Whoops, Frank's outta spells." So I looked at the Spell Points variant. As a video gamer, I can wrap my head around the idea of a "mana system," as seen in games such as Diablo (a game which, aside from the general "plotlessness" has a similar flavor to what I'm going for.) However, when I read the rules, I noticed that this variant was rather - ahem - high powered. "What if I altered it?" I thought. I like the basics, but I think the spell point pool is a little too deep for my preferences. But I didn't know how much was too little, so I decided to playtest it. I rolled up 4 fifth level characters with Elite Arrays, gave them generic classes, and added the unaltered spell point variant to the spellcaster class. Then I chose spells that would fit in my setting. Two of the PCs were spellcasters; one of them was spellcaster 5, with spells focused in necromancy and summoning, and the other was an expert 3/spellcaster 2, with long ranged attacks and spells to supplement his archery abilities. Actually, without going so far as to list the builds, here's the party in brief= Alphonsus - Warrior 5, tank character Borius - Expert 3/Spellcaster 2, magic ranged support Corvus - Spellcaster 5, necromancy and summoning support Diane- Expert 5, scout, sneak attacker, skirmisher I sent these four up against level appropriate beater monsters from the MM - an easy, high hit point opponent (Umber Hulk Zombie), a beefy fighter (Wearbear), and a tricky special ability opponent (Hydra). The fact that none of the tests so far have included spellcasting monsters is a mistake I will remedy. I chose the monsters randomly according to CR, and those are the three tests I've done so far. Here were my findings - Umber Hulk Zombie Fight (9 rounds)- Easy match. Nobody can turn him, but Corvus' ray of enfeeblement takes the wind out of his sails and various summoned monsters with smite evil help out a lot (which is pertinent to my current idea for campaign rules since undead count as tainted and all spells and abilities related to evil will become related to taint.) Diane slashes the zombie into submission, and short work is made of it. Too easy... it's CR 5 and the party hardly had to drink any potions. Corvus still has plenty of spell points left. Borius has all 6 of his. They could have taken on three of those. Werebear Fight (8 rounds)- A bit tougher. In a serendipitous event, Borius is carrying silvered arrows. He uses true strike in conjunction with a couple of arrows to soften it up, then Corvus breaks out the ray of enfeeblement to knock down its considerable strength and damage capabilities. It still hits hard, but with some mid combat healing from Corvus (who has a wand of cure light wounds), the party comes out sore, but not so bad. This fight was faster, but the party was at least challenged. Corvus still has 7 out of 23 spell points. Borius has 4 out of 6. Hydra Fight(14 rounds) - The test party pays for their luck at having silver arrows here - nobody has Improved Sunder. There are lots of attacks of opportunity here, and everyone but Borius takes a beating. The AoO are soaked up in part by summoned monsters, and Corvus opens with his customary ray of enfeeblement to make the monster more manageable. The party tries to sunder heads, but the only acid/fire attacks they have are acid sprays from summoned celestial giant bombardier beetles- an attack that has a low Fort DC that the Hydra only fails once. By the time five heads are on the ground (and the Hydra has seven now), the party just starts killing it the hard way - beating it into submission. Corvus switches to heal mode (which gets him pretty beat up, since the Hydra has long reach) and the others wail on the Hydra enough to out-damage its fast healing 16. Slowly but surely, it goes down. Corvus still has 11 spell points left, though. Borius has all 6. Barring he hydra fight, these were a little too easy. The DMG states the rules are designed so that a fight where the CR equals the mean party level is one where 20% of the party's resources are used. Now, if you look at the figures you might think this is true of these fights, but the entire party still has healing potions and Corvus has wands. So I'd say the worst hit their resources ever took was about 10% with the hydra. I think that Corvus needed to have a shallower pool of spell points. I don't really know how much, but I'm going to retest and try with too little and then work a happy medium. Perhaps he should have 20% of the spell point pool he had? This way he has a small pool of spell points that replenish often during the day. And he couldn't use more than 20% of that particular resource in one encounter. I'm also thinking of allowing spell points to dip below 0 and fatigue the caster (using up twice your alloted spell points knocks you unconscious), but I'm not sure how this will work out. I'm also not sure if decreasing the spell points will work at every level, or cause problems when the caster wants to use high level spells (what if 20% of the normal spell point pools doesn't allow you to cast a 9th level spell at level 18?) I don't have the spell point rules in front of me but... wait that's lazy... online SRD. I look up the spell point rules and make the calculation. Nevermind, an 18th level caster with a 16 Int (or whatever) and 20% of his normal spell points still has 45 spell points. This means he can cast 2 9th level spells in one encounter (for 17 spell points each) and still have 11 spell points left over for weaker spells. I think that seems okay (?). I'm not sure how quickly spell points will come back, so I'll have to work that out at some point after some more playtesting. I'm going to playtest this 20% of normal spell points thing and see if the characters get slaughtered. Not right now, but soon. Also, a quick note just so I don't forget. I thought of this while I was writing. What if spell components weren't free? Like what if, to cast spells or make items magical, you needed to collect spell components from monsters. These components would seem worthless to common folk... like hydra teeth or ground minotaur ivory, but would come in really handy to adventurers. That way, there would be a measurable, separate, system of magical wealth. This would also give me the opportunity to go to individual spells and pull out spell components that clash with the flavor of my setting. Spellcasters in my world don't use bat guano or miniature copper rods. I set that prospect aside and I'll think about it more later. **************************************** *****************
Elessar 08-02-07, 04:28 PM	**************************************** ******************* Another quick note to self: Corvus had a Raven familiar, but it hardly saw any use. The latest D&D podcast had both game designers admitting that familiars are rather clunky rules-wise. Maybe I could find a way to streamline them, just for my own purposes. I like the idea of having a flying familiar fly up to an unreachable area, then casting Benign Interposition on him to switch places. In fact, I think this is one of the major things a familiar should be: a helper for casting spells. Delivering touch attacks and such. Basically, being the caster's navigational aide. Not a combat stat block. Also, there should be a little more flavor to them for my purposes. I stow these thoughts away for later use. **************************************** *******************
Elessar 08-02-07, 05:34 PM	**************************************** ******************* Yet another quick note to self: What to do regarding spell preparation? Will spellcasters be more like Wizards or like Sorcerers? The generic spellcaster is basically a sorcerer, but I like the idea of having to study lore to cast magic, even if the lore isn't written. I also like the idea of having a wide range of possible spells to cast as a character, but being able to take only a small subset of those spells on an adventure with you. I think I might have the solution. Spellcasters can memorize their spell selection from a larger library of spells (either from a spellbook or from some magical mentor figure), but it takes a week's worth of uninterrupted practice to do so. So they operate like sorcerers during an adventure, having a small repertoire of selected spells, but then can exchange these spells known the way a wizard does during down time, at the expense of needing to keep a spellbook or having someone who knows those spells to coach them. **************************************** *****************
Me, Myself, & 101 others 08-02-07, 06:33 PM	A couple thoughts. You mentioned the spell recharge rates, but how they didn't work very well for you because you'd have to keep track of the recharge rates. Well, this is only a problem if you don't think the PC's will accurately (or honestly) keep track of their characters' recharge. But, one way to handle it would be to use counters. Get rid of the random die roll for recharge and replace it with a number, like the average roll. After the spell is cast, place a number of counters on it to represent how long before it's recharged. At the start of every round, remove a counter from each spell. Should be relatively easy, and you can use any small that you have in quantity as counters. For spells with long durations, the simplest solution would be to rule that the spell can't be recast while the previous duration is still going. Some spells will still need to be tweaked, but this seems the simplest solution. As for preparing spells, another thing you might look at is the spirit shaman in Complete Divine. They cast spells spontaneously likea sorcerer, but they choose their spells known each day. You could do something like this, or something like this combined with a spellbook. I think taking a week to reset your spell list is a little extreme, and (unless you're palying a social/intrigue based game) discourage some characters from knowing a lot of spells. Like, 'wall of stone' is of pretty limited use, except in certain situations. But a fireball is useful almost every time you enter combat. if they had to spend a week changing their lists, a lot of players wouldn't bother except to upgrade. On a different note, I really like the idea of the wealth system. I went and found a copy of Game of Thrones to look it over, and it seems really interesting. I'm not sure how well it'd actually work in practice, at least not without some additional work. I love the idea of not having to mess around with coins, and the amount of currency that you can accumulate in a mid-to-high level D&D game is just staggering. But, the wealth system is a little too vague. They don't really give any information for raising or lowering it, except as a temporary modifier. You can raise it with a feat, but that could get pretty feat-intensive if you want higher wealth and is a little unrealistic. Like, say you get a big windfall (a treasure hoard, a big prize in a tournament, whatever). This will temporarily give you a wealth increase, but as you spend it'll dissipate. There's no guidelines for holding on to it, like if the player takes all that newly aquired wealth and buys shares in merchant vessels, or uses it to establish a land holding, or otherwise us it as "seed money." Nor does it cover permanent losses. Some more examples of what you can buy with each level of weath, and what purchases would result in a temporary (or even permanent) wealth reduction. In addition to giving a better guage of what each level meant, it would make it easier to convert the wealth system for use in your more typical D&D game where magic is common place and players would be interested in buying items.
Werral 08-02-07, 07:10 PM	For low powered magic how about the system from Call of the Cthullu D20? Casting spells causes ability damage (or drain for more powerful spells) and makes you lose sanity. You could tone these aspects down a little to raise the magic level Or look on the "Rebuilding the Magic System" thread. Have fun!
jagggar 08-02-07, 07:55 PM	Okay, sure, it's probably not exactly what you're looking for, but I can never resist: D20 Modern (http://www.dominion-x.net/d20-msrd/index.html) As far as spellpoints, which class did you base the generic spellcaster's spellpoints on? Did you remember to spend additional points on any spells which may have had a level based effect?
Elessar 08-02-07, 10:26 PM	A couple thoughts. You mentioned the spell recharge rates, but how they didn't work very well for you because you'd have to keep track of the recharge rates. Well, this is only a problem if you don't think the PC's will accurately (or honestly) keep track of their characters' recharge. But, one way to handle it would be to use counters. I trust my players' honesty, but since this will be a new system to them, they might just not remember. I see the advantages of the recharge system compared to the spell point system- it lets the player go the whole day and cast as many spells as he can recharge in that time. He doesn't have the same flexibility granted by the spell point system though, since if he wants to cast the same spell twice in a row, it has to be prepared twice (if I'm reading it correctly.) However, as I see it, with the spell point system I only rarely have to reference a chart mid-game. All the spell point maximums are worked out beforehand, and all the in-game calculations are simple subtraction. With the recharge system, when a player says "I cast speak with dead," I'll have to respond "OK, hold on while I look it up to see if it has a special recharge time." Whereas with the spell point system, I can just say "What level is it? 3? OK, subtract 5 spell points." If the concern is letting spellcasting ability have a turn based regeneration, why not just say "Spell points recover at a rate of 1 per minute of non-strenuous activity?" Would that work, or is there some benefit to the recharge system I'm not seeing? I don't mean to be a stick-in-the-mud, I just shudder at the thought of having to pull out that table all the time (and if I use non-core spells, I'll have to ad-hoc recharge times and add them to my own addendum table.) As for preparing spells, another thing you might look at is the spirit shaman in Complete Divine. Hmm... sounds cool. I'll have to check it out. I know a friend who has that book. I think taking a week to reset your spell list is a little extreme I see your point, but by extension, aren't Sorcerers even worse off? They only get to change their spell lists in a minor way every time they level. Still, Sorcerers are the casters known to seldom take any spells that aren't damage dealers, so your point is well taken. I like the idea of having some pre-adventure strategizing; as if the players were picking their spells like members of a team- "Well, lets see, I'm going to an underground crypt, so I'll have to bring some anti-undead spells, also some restoration spells just in case any of them deal ability damage. Oh, and a light spell of course so the characters can see..." Maybe a week is too strict. I just used that as an arbitrary number to prevent spellcasters from just switching their entire focus overnight, especially in the face of a time limit. What if it were two days? On a different note, I really like the idea of the wealth system... Yeah that sounds nice and simple.. I might use it (with modifications as you said.) It sounds like the system from d20 modern. Still doesn't exactly fix the magic item problem, but it will make bookkeeping a lot easier and I'm all for that. For low powered magic how about the system from Call of the Cthullu D20? Casting spells causes ability damage (or drain for more powerful spells) and makes you lose sanity. You could tone these aspects down a little to raise the magic level Or look on the "Rebuilding the Magic System" thread. Thanks I'll check those out. Like I said, not sure I want my characters going insane for casting spells, but it wouldn't hurt to take a look. Okay, sure, it's probably not exactly what you're looking for, but I can never resist: D20 Modern As far as spellpoints, which class did you base the generic spellcaster's spellpoints on? Did you remember to spend additional points on any spells which may have had a level based effect? Yeah, I've already had d20 Modern pop up in my head a few times, especially when people started mentioning alternative wealth systems. I based the spell points on the sorcerer's spell points, with the logic that the generic spellcaster is based off of the sorcerer class. And as for the additional points, I think that only applies to level increases that deal extra dice of damage, unless I'm mistaken. The only spell used in my playtest like that was magic missile, and it was cast from a wand. Still, there's a thought. If I just went and applied the level increase costs to all aspects of spells that deal with caster level, perhaps the party resources would dip down to where they should be after the battle... Thanks for the feedback all. I'll work on this problem more at my next opportunity.
FponkDamn 08-03-07, 12:09 AM	There are a few variants on the Spell Point system you could use to make it a bit less "top heavy." Two ideas to consider: Keep the total spell pool, but divide it into five equal groups (so a caster with 100 points has 20 in each). As you progress through the groups, different effects take place; as long as you're in your first 20%, you're fine. When you get to the next 20%, you could be forced to make a Fort save or become fatigued; whether you succeed or not, you need to make a new save (at progressively higher DCs) each time you cross a new 20% threshold, remembering that when fatigued, if any new effect would also make you fatigued, you become exhausted. So the casters still get their total points for the day, but the more they use at once, the more likely they are to become fatigued. Since an hour of rest removes the fatigue condition, but it takes 8 hours to remove exhausted, players are more likely to ration. In such a system, you'd have to carefully moniter (or remove entirely) spells or effects that can remove fatigue. I don't really like this idea, but I figured there's no such thing as a bad idea in a brainstorming session. Another idea is simply to say that spellcasters take nonlethal damage equal to the spell points they spend. Spend 5 points on a level 3 spell? Take 5 nonlethal damage. Nonlethal damage goes away pretty quickly outside of combat, but a spellcaster using too many points in one fight runs the risk of knocking himself out, even if he never gets hit. Plus, this solution has the advantage of being very simple, easy to remember and understand, and not entirely crippling. I like this idea myself - if I used spell points, I'd almost certainly use it. Turning [Evil] spells into depravity-increasing ones is a cool idea - might steal that one for my next game in this world. :) I do like the Spirit Shaman system. Casting like Sorcerers, but with the ability to change their "spells known" every day. Sounds like an easy combination with Spell Points, and fun to play. When I used the spell recharge times, I just made sure each spellcaster wrote down the time next to each spell (I also have players write down things such as book and page number next to spells, to cut down on look-up times), but I see how it seems daunting. And honestly, it seems like Spell Points are a better fit for your campaign. Again, good luck! - Johnny
Me, Myself, & 101 others 08-03-07, 02:19 AM	If the concern is letting spellcasting ability have a turn based regeneration, why not just say "Spell points recover at a rate of 1 per minute of non-strenuous activity?" Would that work, or is there some benefit to the recharge system I'm not seeing? I don't mean to be a stick-in-the-mud, I just shudder at the thought of having to pull out that table all the time (and if I use non-core spells, I'll have to ad-hoc recharge times and add them to my own addendum table.) Don't get me wrong, I don't think one is necessarily superior to the other. It's a matter of finding which one will work best for you. Each has it's strength's and weaknesses. As you said, the spellpoint system is generally easier to figure out. But, it's got drawbacks, too. Like, with a spell point system that recharges, you've got very little reason to conserve your points. So you can just unload your highest spells over and over, and then know that by the time you get to another encounter. On the other hand, with the recharge rate you can only still cast them a limited number of times in a fight. Also, if you limit the spell points too severely, in a truly large scale fight your casters will run out of power, then they're reduced to a schmuck with a crossbow and feeling pretty useless about themselves. Nothing's worse than getting halfway through the climatic battle and not being able to do anything. On a recharge they'd have more staying power, and in a longer fight their spells would come back on line. Recharge does have a bit more book keeping though. I think most of the special recharge times could probably be eliminated, but there might still be some things you had to reference or rework. I see your point, but by extension, aren't Sorcerers even worse off? They only get to change their spell lists in a minor way every time they level. Still, Sorcerers are the casters known to seldom take any spells that aren't damage dealers, so your point is well taken. You're right, they'd be better off than sorcerers. Looking at it mechanically, it's not bad at all. But, if I look at it as a player, I don't like it. I'm not a big fan of sorcs, I'd much rather have versatility than have a few extra spells per day only to find none of them get the job done. I like the mechanics of clerics, wizards, and the like who can have a different selection each day as the situation warrants. And, to find out in a new campaign all caster will be a variation on the sorc would leave me inclined to play a non-caster class. That's me, though, there are others who are find of sorcerers and I'm sure they'd have no problem. I like the idea of having some pre-adventure strategizing; as if the players were picking their spells like members of a team- "Well, lets see, I'm going to an underground crypt, so I'll have to bring some anti-undead spells, also some restoration spells just in case any of them deal ability damage. Oh, and a light spell of course so the characters can see..." Exactly. That's what I prefer, as a player. I like versatility, and being able to tailor myself to the situation. Maybe a week is too strict. I just used that as an arbitrary number to prevent spellcasters from just switching their entire focus overnight, especially in the face of a time limit. What if it were two days? If it was me, as a player, I still wouldn't be thrilled with it. As I said, the wizard-type is my preference over sorcerer-types. What about, instead of limiting how often they can prepare new spells, you limit how they learn spells? Like the wizard domain variants, or like how the shadowcaster in tome of magic has spell paths, and each spell on it unlocks the next in line. (There was a similiar system in Dragon back in 2nd ed, too)
Elessar 08-04-07, 08:07 PM	**************************************** ******************* OK, so after the great feedback from you guys, I've been thinking a lot about your ideas. Me, Myself, and 101 others has a valid concern in the enjoyability of playing a spellcaster in this campaign. My original idea to make spells changeable with a week of rest is now on trial, and the questions I have to ask are: "Why did I want it this way? What flavor does this add to the campaign? Would it be broken to allow a more lenient option?" The fact that I can't really provide solid answers to the first two questions and the fact that "not really" is the answer to the third pretty much tells me I ought to scrap that rule and just make spells able to be prepared after 8 hours of rest. Heck that's even much easier to remember since it's written in the standard rules. Now to deal with the ultra-versatility of this new caster class of mine. Well, FponkDamn had a pretty cool idea with the whole "one-nonlethal-damage-per-spell-point" system. But as Me, Myself, and 101 others points out, if I limit spellcasters too much, it's just going to lead to spellcasters resorting to crossbows in the early game when they run out of the ability to cast spells (mid- and late-game spellcasters would still have wands, staffs, scrolls, etc.) And that is, I concur, no fun. But what if I implemented the nonlethal damage route, but added an alchemical item to the game that heals non-lethal damage? Am I being the old lady who swallowed the spider to catch the fly? Anyways, if I implement this change the cool thing is that I don't change the spell point system anymore and just use nonlethal damage as the cap for casting too many high level spells in a row. In addition, this adds a compensatory measure for the class's versatility - the spellcaster becomes by his very nature even more squishy. **************************************** *****************
Me, Myself, & 101 others 08-04-07, 09:52 PM	I think non-lethal damage per spell point could work, depending on how you implement it. I wouldn't make it a straight, set, 1-for-1 ratio. At least not unless you want a very low magic setting. Since you're talking about mid-to-high level characters having wands, potions, and other "disposable" magic I'm guessing you're going to have the magic level roughly similar to generic D&D. In that kind of environment, I don't think 1-for-1 nonlethal damage really works. Looking at it out of character, it's almost like you're punishing players for using their class features. Say you're a 1st level spellcaster, you've got a +1 to con and four spell points. That leaves you with 5 hitpoints, cast two spells and get hit once and you're all but guaranteed to be knocked down. Say 5th level, assuming average hitpoints you'd have 17 hp, two 3rd level spells would again put you in the position where one good hit will knock you down. Then you're left hoping that you have at least 2 hours between combat, which often may not be feasible. Even with a potion to take away non-lethal damage it's still pretty rough. What if you run out of potions? Or they break/get stolen? And, no one else has to spend gold to use their class features. Looking at it from a role-play perspective, it still doesn't work with most settings (again, unless we're talking low-magic). Non-lethal damage would be, basically, pain. Every spell you cast is causing yourself pain and suffering. How many people would be interested in magic under those conditions? How many would stick through their training when every spell cast hurts them? Your average spellcaster would be insane (or, at the very least, masochistic). They would use spells as seldom as possible, and reliance on magic items would be high (and those magic items would cost much more due to high demand and the fact that their makers must hurt themselves to create them). How many people would learn magic to go adventuring, knowing that they're going to be hurt each and every time they contribute? Magic couldn't really be seen as a path to power, not when every spell makes you weaker and more vulnerable to your attackers. You could alternately look at nonlethal damage as fatigue and exhaustion, but that's not really much better. There could really be many motivated spellcasters, not when every spell makes you want to go lie down. If a couple spells left you fatigued, your typical mage would develope a serious lazy streak. The system can work though, as long as it's not a direct 1-for-1. As long as there's a window where you can "safely" cast, that would allieviate a lot of the problems. There's a few different ways you could do that. You could make it so that spells X levels lower than your maximum can be cast without damage. For example (just picking numbers at random), if you could cast 4th level spells then first level spells might be non-damaging, then when you progress to 5th level spells you'll be able to cast 2nd level spells without hurting yourself. But, this would still discourage people from going into magic, since the point where they could do anything easily would be a long way off. You could do a caster level check. Pick a difficulty number (10, 15, whatever works for you) and add the spell level for the DC. If you make the DC, you take no damage. That way you're only hurting if you "mess up." And, as you get more powerful the lower level spells get easier and easier to "master" (cast without pain). This works, and can have some decent flavor, but it adds another roll which can slow things down. Or, you might have a limited number of points that are "free" and anything beyond that limit starts hurting. Like, figure out what a caster would normally have, give them a percentage of that number (whatever percent works best for your campaign). Those points can be used with no problem. Once they use that reserve, then they can trade damage (lethal or nonlethal as you prefer) for spellpoints. Call it strain, mana burn, or whatever. That way they would be able to do their regular casting, but in emergency situations they could surpass their normal boundries. A couple other magic alternatives: There's the Sha'ir, which was originally from the 2nd Ed. campaign setting Al-Qadim, but was converted over to 3.5 in Dragon. It's in Dragon issue 315, and also the Dragon Compendium. It uses a familiar like creature, called a gen, who goes and retrieves spells for the caster. They can retain one spell at a time, for 1 hour per level. Then, they have to send their gen for another spell. For spells they know, it only takes a couple rounds, for unknown spells it takes minutes, for divine spells (only certain domains) hours. Then, a check is made to see if the gen can retrieve the spell. Also, in Green Ronin's Advanced Player's Guide there's a class called the spellmaster. It works similar to the Sha'ir, but without then gen-familiar. Instead, they make a check and begin gathering energy to power their spell. Once the power is gathered, they can cast it. The number of spells they can "hold" goes up as they level. Again, spells they know only take a few rounds to aquire. But, they can only learn up to 6th level spells. However, they can choose to cast a spell slotlessly, which can be pretty much any spell. But, if they do so they're risking damage (both regular and possibly Con damage depending on how bad they roll). Not sure if either of these ideas would work in your campaign, but thought I'd mention them. They seemed like interesting variations to me.
Xaer 08-05-07, 01:27 PM	Out of those, I'd probably go for the "limited number of points that are "free" and anything beyond that limit starts hurting" option. Makes it so that spellcasting isn't intrinsically harmful to the caster, but extended casting would be, thus making magic more akin to something cool to see in the world, as it won't be happening as often. Might need a few changes to the class stats to balance that, though. As for the "descriptive" part of the nonlethal damage, I seem to be partial to the fatigue/exhaustion side of it. Perhaps if a character is getting close to inflicting a KO on themselves, it might hurt, but overall it's not a very good motivator to become a caster if pain is a "normal" part of the process.
FponkDamn 08-05-07, 06:01 PM	Personally, I like the idea of magic hurting you, and therefore magic becoming rare - it sort of justifies why EVERYONE isn't a wizard. But! You're right about the system being somewhat harmful at the low levels for Wizards. Caster level checks and pools of "safe" casting seem a bit complicated a fix for a simple change, though. The spell points = nonlethal damage system is nice because it's very easy to remember, so if you alter it, you want to keep the alterations similarly simple. I try to avoid any change that creates more dice-rolling, so I wouldn't use caster level checks for every spell. What about one of the following solutions: - Give Casters a "Nonlethal DR" against nonlethal damage from spells, equal to their Con modifier. That's not usually a high number for lower-level wizards, but it should be enough to make the first/second level spells safe. At higher levels, the amount of damage a spell inflicts should be higher than your con mod, but you also have more hit points. Scales well, easy to remember, and makes for some interesting options (such as a Dwarven Wizard being perhaps more optimal than an elven one!). - Have nonlethal damage from spellcasting heal at a much faster rate, say by the minute rather than by the hour. You still get to keep away the effect of a wizard "going nova" in combat, but they're not penalized for as long a time. Also easy to remember. - Create a magical ritual that removes nonlethal damage from spellcasting. Make it a class feature of the wizard at first level, make it take ten minutes or so, and have it remove a large amount of nonlethal damage, say 10 points per level. Then make the actual requirements of the ritual something cool and intrinsic to your campaign setting - if you want Wizards to have an intimate spiritual contact with their ancestor ghosts in order to attain magical power, make the ritual a seance where they make contact with said spirits. It's a more roleplay solution than a mechanical one, but it does allow you to add a campaign-specific flavor to your wizards; maybe the ritual is different for different types of Wizards (think Preservers and Defilers in Dark Sun) and some of the rituals aren't that pleasant (could involve animal sacrifice, bloodletting, or what have you). These solutions keep the mechanical elegance of the 1-for-1 system, but add a measure of balance. I almost want to adopt this system for Psionics in my next campaign... Hope this helps! - Johnny
Ertai Planeswalker 08-05-07, 07:14 PM	Although it would require some more detailed work on your side, i always liked the way magic worked in the SNES game Secret of Evermore. Basically, every spell needs some combination of components in order to be cast. This might somewhat blur the line between alchemy and magic, but it works in my opinion. That way, the amount of spells a spellcaster can cast does not rely on any spells per day or somesuch, but on the amount of spell components he has. Naturally, the higher the level of the spell, the more ingredients it costs, and the less error margin there is in casting it. Therefore, spells can have a casterlevel requirement for the caster, ensuring higher level spells cannot be cast before attaining higher level: For example, lets say the following spells need the following components: (Since they are all evocation-fire spells, the components are similar) Burning hands - One piece of basalt and one piece of sulfur Scorhing Ray - Two pieces of basalt, one piece of sulfur and one part bat guano Fireball - Two pieces of basalt, two pieces of sulfur, and two parts bat guano. Now let's say a pc has, among others 4 pieces of basalt, 3 pieces of sulfur, and 3 parts of bat guano with him. That means he can cast burning hands three times, or two scorching ray spells, or one fireball and one burning hands spell etc. As i said, it takes some more detailed designwork for this, but it can also enrich the campaign by having to seek out new ingredients, some ingredients not being available in certain parts of the world for certain reasons, metamagic spell components etc.
Eldritch_Lord 08-07-07, 03:22 PM	In regards to the subdual-damage-vs.-spell-points debate: How about you have spells deal their cost in subdual damage (ie, 1st level spell = 1 damage, 2nd level = 3 damage, etc.) but the caster can spend spell points to mitigate the damage? So, for example, a caster could start out spending spell points, then start taking damage and risking unconsciousness, or save the spell points until battle and take damage for utility spells when casting isn't dangerous. Obviously, the spell point pools would have to be reduced, probably to about 20-30% normal, because he wouldn't be required to use up spell points to cast a spell. As the caster leveled up, he could improve the tradeoff, maybe getting 1 spell point = 2 subdual damage prevented at 5th level, 1 SP = 3 damage at 10th level, etc., or perhaps increasing the tradeoff could be a feat tree; either way, as the caster increased in power, he'd be able to resist more of the strain that comes from casting spells as he becomes more practiced at it. Just some random musings; what do you think?
BigJohn42 08-07-07, 04:36 PM	In regards to spellcasting: Points vs. Fatigue... here's an idea. (Please note that this is in no way tested or pre-balanced, just an idea). A spellcaster has a pool of X spell points, which goes up by level. Set a recharge rate for spell points (say caster level per minute, scalable to rounds, so that eventually, you can recharge a first level spell each round, without penalty). If a caster is out of spell points, he/she can make a difficult Concentration check (20+spell level?). If the caster passes, they can cast the spell, and take non-lethal damage equal to the missing spell points. This damage does NOT increase any faster than everyday nonlethal damage. If the check fails, then the caster can still have the spell go off, at the cost of lethal damage (and perhaps a roll on the 2ed wild surge table?). Basically, you'd have a fast recharge, an overcasting ability that the caster can whip out in an emergency, but enough of a risk to where they've really gotta want it.
Elessar 08-08-07, 02:58 AM	Great suggestions, guys. I really kind of like Ertai's suggestion of integrating material components as the true cost of casting a spell. It sort of kills two birds with one stone - it both addresses the magic system and the wealth system. **************************************** ******************** I'm thinking right now of having a small spell point pool for casters, supplemented by treasure that acts as "spell points" for specific spell groups, as Ertai has suggested. Basically, your own spell points represent your own magical energy. The magical energy of humans is potent and can be used as a sort of "wild card" spell point for any spell. If you run them down to zero, you become fatigued. In the course of adventuring, however, the heroes of the story will come across other objects and places with inherent spell points. Since my setting has a quasi-Roman theme, this even has a precedent. In ancient Rome, there was the concept of "numina" - supernatural presences similar to the Polynesian concept of mana that were among the earliest beliefs of magic. This primeval numina could be found in treasure such as talismans, fetishes, and charms, and also in archetypal substances like brimstone and bitumen. The numina could have a specific spell point value that only works on spells in the same spell group. These spell groups might just, for simplicity's sake, be the schools of magic, so that for instance bitumen is a necromancy component that provides 3 necromancy spell points, whereas you might have a small tigers eye talisman is an evocation component that provides 5 spell points. These components would be fairly useless to the common merchant except as trinkets or art objects, so they wouldn't affect monetary wealth. However, they'd be invaluable to adventurers, since they'd provide spells and be used in the creation of magic items. Effectively, these components are like "ammunition" for casters. I could also make it so that the spell points you get from components can't be broken down into smaller "change." Therefore, if you end up wasting spell points on a spell because you don't have enough change to get the exact spell points that spell costs, you've wasted those points. In fact, perhaps you even take "burn" in the form of nonlethal damage for every point you exceed the cost of the spell. This way, it pays to save the rarer components that yield large spell points for the rarer, high level spells. It also adds an extra strategic element to spellcasting - so being a caster requires some minor puzzle solving on the player's part. I really like this whole idea, and the fact that it blurs the line between alchemy and magic - it's something that I probably would have added flavor-wise anyways. Thanks to Ertai for that idea, and thanks to everyone else for the continued discussion highlighting the balance issues that are cropping up. What about this proposed component system? Are there problems I'm not seeing? It seems with the whole ammunition idea, a spellcaster basically becomes a lot like an archer - except instead of being a damage dealer, your ammo changes battle dynamics. **************************************** *****************
Dungeonrenter 08-08-07, 02:16 PM	I know exactly what you are talking about. I am almost always the dm of my group. The rules I put in my games have a way of showing up in everybody elses just for convience. However, a lot of my game concepts for a long time seemed like the square peg into a round hole. After floating trough just about every dnd campaign imaginable, I have discovered that it doesn't really matter what I run it ends up being an "epic save the world quest" storyline. Therefore, I just quit worrying about it and went Dragonlance. However, In running all these game worlds and systems I have found some things that might help. With this premise and my mnemonic needs in mind, there are a couple of things I require, rules-wise: A different magic system- I've never read any of Jack Vance's books, so I think it's safe to say that he didn't inspire any of this setting. So the only reason I'd use a Vancian magic system is to save myself the work. Since I'm willing to invest the time, I'd prefer to run a magic system that fits my setting's vision of the way things work. For the image of the magic casters in my campaign, I'm thinking of Brom paintings of witches with sacrificial daggers raised high, the seers and soothsayers of the Conan mythology reading their scattered bone portents, the sorceresses Medea and Circe of Greek myth, and perhaps the sort of academic practitioner who reads old prophecies in the stars for cataclysmic omens. This is before the sort of age where you would find a Merlin (at least the Merlin people usually envision) and magic certainly doesn't involve anything so garish as fireballs or lightning bolts. So I'm going to also be trimming and adding to the spell selection to turn the spellcaster into less of a "glass cannon" and into more of a "glass bag of tricks." Ok, the only problem with this is that unless the whole game is combat light many people will have no desire to be this class at all. However, if you want a system that is close to dnd, but gives TOTALLY different feel for how magic actually works, try using the wheel of time magic system. Honestly, the way they represented the wheel system was amazing. Many of the mechanics are identical, however the spell list, the power of casters, what magic can and can't do is so radically different. It also fits with your lower-subtler magic in some ways. Healing only converts leathal damage to non leathal. Although its still possible to fling a fireball, the majority of the spells for combat are both less impressive damage wise and require a little more inventivness to use. For instance, most casters will only be able to make existing fires larger or smaller at first level. A couple of rounds of concentration and the bandits campfire is spilling out of control. The magic plays VERY differntly from dnd while mechanically its similar enough for anybody who has played dnd to absorb the changes in a single session. A different wealth system- I don't really like the idea of characters hoarding enough money around to break the economy, and then turning around and spending it on wands at Boccob's Magic Item Emporium. They should have magic items, but in this setting, as I've already established, magic is rarer than in usual D&D, subtle, and relatively discrete. If your average tradesman was presented with a powerful magic sword, he might be able to tell it was magical, but he wouldn't know what it was worth besides the amount some rich rube might be willing to squander on it, and he sure wouldn't trust that it wasn't cursed. I also don't like the idea that PCs sell the magic items they acquire on the market like that in my setting. It would be like Bilbo selling Sting at a pawn shop - while it may be realistic for something powerful to turn into a commodity, I don't want it to work that way. Magic isn't the type of thing you just give away. Magic is special in this world. In fact, at the risk of sounding repetitive, I'd go so far as to call it mysterious. So I'm going to have to think up some kind of system where magic has a measurable value that is removed from the world's open market (although it might still be able to be sold on the black market), and then adjust the wealth system accordingly. Again, look at the Wheel of Time role playing game. Magic weapons are super rare, the whole game world works on the premise that magic item creation is impossible. Magic items are so precious that close relatives or even family wouldn't tell each other what they have. Whats more, most of the magic items are not as useful mechanically and instead are more useful for their function. So there are no "gauntlets of ogre strength" but there is a cloak that can camoflague you like a cameleon. It doesn't make you invisible, but it can be pretty close. Magic weapons are limited to a +2 benfit. A different class system- Most of the classes don't really fit with my idea. You could make arguments for all of them, but when it comes down to it, I'd rather just have a simple class system that allows for high customization. Therefore, I'm thinking of using a variant of the generic classes variant in the SRD (a variant of a variant because I'll have to rework the Spellcaster class to fit my new magic system.) Generic classes sound fine. Be very careful of letting players turn class abilties into feats. Also, if you go with the wheel magic system you don't have to change the spellcaster at all. Variant rules to reflect the flavor of the setting I've already mentioned that I want occasional horror moments, and the overall feel of the world is rather dreary, so I'm going to either use the rules for Taint or the rules for Sanity. I'm leaning toward Taint, frankly because there are less rules for it in the SRD (and simpler is better in my book) and because the bit about doing away with alignment entirely and just using Taint as a substitute appeals to the flavor of my setting. Taint is a good choice. I thought heroes of horror had a differnt system but it may be that it just has an updated version of taint. This doesn't really warrant its own bullet since it requires no work, but I'm also going to be doing away with Races entirely. Only humans are playable in this campaign. Magical races exist, but they're mysterious and not for the players to immediately understand and identify with. Again, look at wheel of time for an example of how to make it interesting that everybody is playing humans. So, really it looks like what you want is wheel of time in meets the night watch of ank-morkpork. Sounds sweet.
Elessar 08-10-07, 12:07 AM	Yes, Dungeonrenter, I agree that the Wheel of Time RPG has spells more in line with the ones I want to use in my system. I also remember there being five elements that combine to describe all spells - that was pretty cool... with a bit of real historical precedent to it. That system was still a little too Vancian for me, although as I recall you could also cast beyond your daily limit to risk a loss of sanity. I think I'll definitely borrow spells from it. I remember a couple of really cool ones like a grenade spell where you turn a rock into basically a moltov cocktail. Those spells are scalable too, right? I'll have to track down the guy I know who owns that book and pick and choose flavor-consistent spells from it.