PDA

View Full Version : D&D 3.5 Magic. What went wrong and how to fix it.



Frog Dragon
2009-02-21, 06:59 PM
So it's pretty obvious what the problems are, but I'll list them here for clarity.

- Save or Suck. The ability to make someone totally useless and it's almost unstoppable if targeting a bad save
- Save or Die. As above except for the fact that now the opponent DIES.
- No Save, Just Suck. Being able to do the above, but with not even the save as a foil.
- Buff to High Heaven. The ability to stack/persist buffs to totally outperform other classes in their supposed field of expertise.
- Utility Overkill. Overlaps with the above. Being able to replicate other classes functions by buffing modifiers and replicating their functions by doing stuff with 100% chances when others have to roll. Also being able to solve most anything with the right spell selection
- Say hello to my little friend. Summoning/calling stuff to do things better than the other party members
- 15 Minute Workday. Supposed to balance things out, but it doesn't. It just makes you cast Extended Rope Trick more :smallyuk: blech.
- Can't Touch This. Being able to fly and pull off mobility that others are simply unable to match. The fighter can't even get close when quickened dimdoor strikes in and then we get to the Save or Dies.

Banning things only works to a certain extent when the inherent brokenness exists.

So those things must be addressed and dealt with. I have some possible fixes

Save or Die nerf
Save or Die spells only work if the target has 50% HP of its original total or less. If the target has over 50% of it's max HP then the spell deals 1d6/Caster level damage unless another amount is specified
Furthermore any such effect only brings the target to -1 Hp unless the target has less than 10% of it's Max HP.

I'm sure many people have ways to go about other problems, or better ways to go about Save or Dies. Thie thread exists so we get them summed up and get at least semi-balanced D&D 3.5 Magic:smallsmile:

Draz74
2009-02-21, 08:31 PM
- Save or Suck. The ability to make someone totally useless and it's almost unstoppable if targeting a bad save

IMHO, the cure for this is to make saves better (higher bonuses) in general.

For example, what if bad saves were on the same progression as good saves, except without the Level 1 +2 bonus? (One obvious problem that's not so easy to fix: makes multiclassing dips just to get 3 good saves much too appealing. But in a no-multiclassing campaign, I think this rule would be an improvement.)

thegurullamen
2009-02-21, 09:33 PM
- Save or Suck. The ability to make someone totally useless and it's almost unstoppable if targeting a bad save
- Save or Die. As above except for the fact that now the opponent DIES.
- No Save, Just Suck. Being able to do the above, but with not even the save as a foil.

Immunities go a long way here, but yes. Unless you're good at mitigating this strength (and thus almost always gimping the caster's turn each round), this is hard to deal with. I like your idea, but it seems to be missing something I can't put my finger on.


- Buff to High Heaven. The ability to stack/persist buffs to totally outperform other classes in their supposed field of expertise.
- Utility Overkill. Overlaps with the above. Being able to replicate other classes functions by buffing modifiers and replicating their functions by doing stuff with 100% chances when others have to roll. Also being able to solve most anything with the right spell selection

Can't agree with you here. Buffing takes time and for encounters that require it (equal or higher CR opponents), the players shouldn't have the time they need to stack the right buffs. DMM Persist cheese should be banned outright.
Spells will eventually be depleted. Wasting a slot on Knock when you could use it for something else more useful and less situational is stupid. Using it in a charge item still has the cost of depleting a charge. Typically, you avoid using spells/charges if a party member can do it for free.


- Say hello to my little friend. Summoning/calling stuff to do things better than the other party members

Not sure what you mean here. In D&D, summoning tends to suck unless you're calling in support casters for their 1/day CL 5 MM or the like.


- 15 Minute Workday. Supposed to balance things out, but it doesn't. It just makes you cast Extended Rope Trick more :smallyuk: blech.

Rope Trick does not work that way. There is nothing in the spell that indicates that it can serve as a decent resting spot. For all you know, it's really uncomfortable in there and sleeping is impossible. (Fine, there's nothing saying RT can't do all of that, but as a DM, I usually put these limits on it to prevent 15 minute days.
Other tricks:
--time limits
--scouting monsters (try sleeping when you're woken up every two hours by death and chaos)
--environmental conditions (same as the above, but completely prevent sleeping, thus encouraging a long haul with no rest)
--harsh consequences for teleporting out after nova-ing (here you have to be creative. It could be anything from a constantly changing/moving dungeon to being magically followed to DIM. ANCHOR [omgno!!])

Draz74
2009-02-22, 03:20 AM
Rope Trick does not work that way. There is nothing in the spell that indicates that it can serve as a decent resting spot. For all you know, it's really uncomfortable in there and sleeping is impossible. (Fine, there's nothing saying RT can't do all of that, but as a DM, I usually put these limits on it to prevent 15 minute days.
Other tricks:
--time limits
--scouting monsters (try sleeping when you're woken up every two hours by death and chaos)
--environmental conditions (same as the above, but completely prevent sleeping, thus encouraging a long haul with no rest)
--harsh consequences for teleporting out after nova-ing (here you have to be creative. It could be anything from a constantly changing/moving dungeon to being magically followed to DIM. ANCHOR [omgno!!])

Time limits are great, but only when they happen to work with the story. Similarly, environments that prevent resting well are a good strategy, if the adventure happens to involve questing through the belly of a volcano or something.

Scouting monsters are OK, but they only prevent the 15-minute workday if Rope Trick isn't involved. And if the party is constantly getting harassed by random encounters/scouting monsters whenever they try to have a lazy day, but doesn't get ambushed during the night after a nice long day of fighting, you're breaking verisimilitude.

Your other suggestions smack of DM-ex-machina. And once you start homebrewing nasty consequences for teleporting out, you're already tacitly admitting that Frog Dragon is right, and that the 15-minute workday needs a fix in the rules.

thegurullamen
2009-02-22, 05:46 AM
Time limits are great, but only when they happen to work with the story. Similarly, environments that prevent resting well are a good strategy, if the adventure happens to involve questing through the belly of a volcano or something.

A lot of locations can be made inhospitable. Mountains with few flat surfaces to lie on, ruins with no structurally sound areas, caves with countless switchbacks and ambush spots along with geological instabilities.


Scouting monsters are OK, but they only prevent the 15-minute workday if Rope Trick isn't involved.

See provisos on RT.


And if the party is constantly getting harassed by random encounters/scouting monsters whenever they try to have a lazy day, but doesn't get ambushed during the night after a nice long day of fighting, you're breaking verisimilitude.

Who says they don't get harassed constantly? It's exceptionally mean, but being an adventurer isn't supposed to be easy. And there's always the option to flee if things are too difficult.


Your other suggestions smack of DM-ex-machina. And once you start homebrewing nasty consequences for teleporting out, you're already tacitly admitting that Frog Dragon is right, and that the 15-minute workday needs a fix in the rules.

Well, yeah, it does. A lot of what I've suggested falls into the house ruling category but a lot of it can be done through some simple DM prep work and mitigation. Personal preferences are important here. For example, I think that if your PCs are putting in a 15 minute work day everytime they step out the door, make them pay for it and then some. Design a dungeon or two around exploiting their weaknesses (such as squandering party resources and running away.) They're probably not the first party to have thought up the tele-in-nuke-tele-out strategy and by the level a party can do that, an appropriate CR'd dungeon should account for that.

Arguably, you could also withhold XP. They're using more resources than they should on every 15mad encounter according to the CR/XP system, so dock them an appropriate amount. This doesn't solve anything but it lets your players know that you're not happy with their actions. Albeit in a somewhat passive aggressive way...
Finally and most importantly, just tell your PCs to stop doing it. Personally, I don't care if it's the "Smart option" or it's "what my character would do with his high Int", it's bending the rules and ruining my (the DM's) fun. Knock it off. Ideally, this should come before any of the above, but yeah.

Frog Dragon
2009-02-22, 06:23 AM
IMHO, the cure for this is to make saves better (higher bonuses) in general.

For example, what if bad saves were on the same progression as good saves, except without the Level 1 +2 bonus? (One obvious problem that's not so easy to fix: makes multiclassing dips just to get 3 good saves much too appealing. But in a no-multiclassing campaign, I think this rule would be an improvement.)

Following your idea and this could work when multiclassing.

Level|Good Save|Bad Save
1.|+2|+1
2.|+3|+2
3.|+4|+2
4.|+4|+3
5.|+5|+3
6.|+6|+4
7.|+7|+4
8.|+7|+5
9.|+8|+5
10.|+9|+6
11.|+10|+6
12.|+10|+7
13.|+11|+7
14.|+12|+8
15|+13|+8
16|+13|+9
17|+14|+9
18|+15|+10
19|+16|+10
20|+16|+11

Fractional BAB/Saves purposes
|Good|Bad
Per Level|0,7|0,5
Starting|2,7|1,5
Seem good?

Neithan
2009-02-22, 06:37 AM
If the gm allows the players to make 15 minutes work days. Well, it's his own fault!

Frog Dragon
2009-02-22, 06:55 AM
And most players are fully capable of teleing out, maybe hiding a... (what was that spell that allowed you to teleport to the location of an item?).... well that item, resting, coming back. Constant blockage of these tactics simply breaks versimilitude when not everyone has prepared for it.

PinkysBrain
2009-02-22, 07:06 AM
IMHO, the cure for this is to make saves better (higher bonuses) in general.
The problem for this is that you break compatibility ... the Save or Die fix from the OP is nice in that it's almost completely orthogonal to the rest of the game. I think the same fix can work for most save or suck effects, just make a list of most effects and determine HP cut offs for them to not function and do damage instead.

In this way HP start having the same function for DD attacks as for effect attacks ... you have a primary "save" which allows you to completely avoid the attack (for normal attacks this is your AC) and then a hitpoint pool which represents a secondary and limited ability to shrug of the attack. There is a certain elegance in unifying this function of the hitpoint pool for all attacks.

Frog Dragon
2009-02-22, 07:35 AM
Like this?

Save or Suck Nerf
If a character is hit by a debilitating effect and (s)he still has more than 50% of his/her maximum Hit point total left (s)he can instead choose to take 1d4 per caster level damage, representing absorbing and dulling the magic by force

Edit: Added one more facet of magic overpoweredness

PinkysBrain
2009-02-22, 08:15 AM
I'd make the save or suck effects do d4s worth of damage.

Frog Dragon
2009-02-22, 08:48 AM
Might make sense. And it makes blasting more useful so you can bring the HP:s down for debuff.

Frog Dragon
2009-02-22, 02:38 PM
That would of course work against No Save just Suck too :smallsmile:

We have some sort of fixes to three problems. Most mitigating combat superiority. Now to brainstorm fixes to the others.

Frog Dragon
2009-02-23, 08:50 AM
By the way. As is well known. Evocation is "the standard banned school" Our rulings give direct damage a hand as you need it to start getting your more powerful spells through, but this does not help when conjuration does everything Evocation can do.

So my suggestions are (also another reshuffle of subschools)

- Give the Creation subschool to Evocation
- Give the orb line of spells to Evocation
- Give the Healing subschool to Necromancy

That should swat conjuration overpoweredness in the face and give Evocaiton something fun, right?

TheGrimace
2009-02-23, 10:37 AM
I've always believed that the cure spells should go necromancy, but that doesn't substantially effect the wizard (who is the one who would be taking the forbidden school).

My personal opinion is that the Orb spells should be kicked to the curb! Spells like that make half the other spells in the game (not worthless, but how about "inferior"). However, if you intend to keep them, evocation is good.

Besides, summon a non magical ball of force to shoot at your enemy?
what?

Triaxx
2009-02-23, 06:07 PM
Ditch or lessen spell resistance. As it is now, it's not balancing, just annoying. Most 'Save or' spells either ignore it, or aren't bothered by it. Perhaps making it only work on effect spells, and then giving damage resistance the ability to reduce magical damage. So if you've got DR you're still vulnerable to 'Save or' spells, and if you've got SR things like Magic Missile will still hit.

Falling Out
2009-02-23, 07:00 PM
One idea I had but have never tested:

1) Increase all Casting Times. Summoning a dark netherlord likely takes a bit more work then swinging a sword twice.

Standard action -> full rounds (makes the majority of spells interruptible)
Full Rounds -> multi-rounds (summoning somethings takes time and prep - balance by letting it last longer)

This cuts down the tactical options and means the spellcaster must be far more mindful of where and when they cast because interruption becomes a real possibility. Means they need to prepare more things ahead of time (makes sense for the high int guy to plan ahead).

(ie. move action is to open the spellbook and find the right page - no real 'memorization'. Then the standard to start casting wrapped together as a full round)

2) Impromptu casters (like Sorcerer) not affected by the time increase (no book to get out and read)

3) Balance by letting them 'ready' a spell ahead of time that can be cast as a swift action (no interruption possible - they already made the motions). If they take damage/stress prior to using it they must make a concentration check to keep it.

4) This means wizards can choose anything in their spellbook (no memorizing subset of spells each day) but still limited to spells/day.

This means that if they are prepared they can get off a quick spell right away - but from then on they are slower and more prone to interruptions.

This also increases the difference between the sorcerer/wizard. Sorcerer is the same - fast caster, lots of reserves, but limited options. The wizard becomes - even more variety (max batman), but a far slower and controlled caster.

Clerics and druids fall in with the wizard. They need to open their prayer books/scrolls/meditate/take time to connect with nature and thus are slower in calling out divine power. The Favoured Soul/Spirit Shaman are sorcerer-like with the faster impromptu spells.

lesser_minion
2009-02-23, 07:35 PM
I think I was planning on changing Standard Action spellcasting to One-round casting time, like you said, although the caster would also be allowed to move 30ft (this represents the idea that even though it took until the start of your next round to cast the spell, you could still walk around while casting).

One idea I had for death attacks was to have them always inflict an amount of damage (single target had fortitude or will saves, AoE death spells permitted Reflex as well), but also prevent all attempts to revive the subject using magic if the subject died from the spell (unless you used a True Res, Wish or Miracle to undo the enchantment first). That made them reasonably weak, but they could still terrify players if needed - they always struck me as something scary that would be best avoided, and probably banned outright by arcane circles.

I also wanted to make spell disruption a bit nastier. The idea I came up with ended up being:

Attacked in melee during the casting of a spell: DC equal to the attacker's attack roll Targeted by a spell during the casting: DC = enemy wizard's CL check. Takes damage or fails a save during the casting of a spell: spell disrupted automatically


I would also probably have a few defensive buffs, like mage armour shatter when they fail to protect the character. A few others would probably be changed to Concentration duration - let's see you use that Shield spell now, Batman!

Frog Dragon
2009-02-23, 11:59 PM
4) This means wizards can choose anything in their spellbook (no memorizing subset of spells each day) but still limited to spells/day.

Batman Wizards everywhere now revere you as a god:smallsigh: I'd totally take full round actions to get ANY SPELL IN MY BOOK if I was a wizard. Most spells still go out in 1 round. Fly and they will have a very hard time hitting unless they are mages too when you have Wind Wall, Stoneskin and Fly up. Then it doesn't matter if it's a standard action or a full round action. Now the wizard pwns even more:smallannoyed:

Frog Dragon
2009-02-24, 09:22 AM
Would it be a good idea to change Concentration a tad. The DC 15 quickly becomes trivial. Maybe say.... make it DC 10+the curent attack bonus of the enemy with the highest attack bonus+2 for everyone else adjecent to the caster

Example. Mialee wants cast defensively because he doesn't want to provoke AOO from the rogue and the fighter next to him. The fighter has a BaB of +9 and a +4 Strenght bonus. He is wielding a +1 greatsword so his attack bonus with it is +14. The rogue has a BaB of +5, wields a nonmagical shortsword with weapon finesse. His dexterity modifier is +3.
We see that the fighter has the higher attack bonus of the two so we add it to the DC. The DC is now 24. The we add the +2 for the rogue for a total of DC 26

Falling Out
2009-02-24, 10:07 AM
Oh ya, in my little test word I think I would have to get rid of defensive casting completely. And even then, if enemies see someone powering up (full round casting) they are going to try and stop them if at all possible.

Batman's of the world are overjoyed...until they realize that if anything is near them they really are a squishy unless properly prepared.


(in my DM'd games, with my players, I would take prepared and pwnage, over the normal no-thinking-involved-blast-smash-win any day)

Dienekes
2009-02-24, 11:32 AM
My vague ideas on the subject

Save or Die: Just take them out. As a tool used by PCs they're only purpose is to walk past encounters. As a tool used by NPCs, well most PCs would be incredibly disappointed if they died instantly against a Big Bad because of one spell, and because of this most GMs I know don't use them.

Save or Suck: I'd use your Save or Die nerf on them. Seems pretty fair.

No Save, Just Suck: I honestly can't think of a way to balance these

Buff to High Heaven: Make some of the spells unable to target the caster, or if they are used to target the caster cost 1 higher spell slot. This would actually be a bit of a rewrite of a bunch of spells but I think would successfully put classes back in their roles.

Utility Overkill: Kind of the wizards thing, and while powerful I wouldn't take it away. Just remember that the wizard does have to get spell components and to fill spell slots they're there for a reason of balancing.

Say Hello to My Little Friend: I don't actually think it's that overpowered. But I'd as a rule believe that summoning a being from elsewhere should take longer (I have nothing to back this claim it just seems right to me), so this would be the spells that get elongated in casting time.

15 Minute Workday: Has never come up in my gaming parties, so I don't have a solution

Can't Touch This: True a fighter cannot hit them, but I don't think that's much a problem as the party shouldn't be fighting each other. I'd guess I'd have them maintain concentration checks to keep themselves afloat, and of course increasing DC if you're being shot at or distracted. It'd still be useful but remember that if you do lose concentration you can go splat.

Darth Stabber
2009-02-24, 11:58 AM
Yeah getting rid of defensive casting would short circuit full casters a bit. Though as per the SRD the DC to cast a spell defensively is 15+spell level, not a huge increase but it matters. And full round action spell open wizards up to round of pain in between the start of casting and the spell actually going off. A start to the fix would be to rearrange the spell schools. My fix is similar to frog dragon's

-Orb spells move to evo
-any force spell moves to evo
-Prismatic anything moves to evo
-Cure and inflict move to Necro
-Shadow evocation line banned (This alone is a good fix against people auto banning Evo, since they can't cheat it anymore, ditto shadow conjuration)
-Increase damage caps on spells (make fire ball cap at something like 12-14 d6 as opposed to 10
-Move some of Transmutation and conjuration's damage spell over to Evo (seriously acid arrow, and disintegrate should already be over there any way, seriously are you transmuting there body to ashes or what?)

That being said I can't support summon monsters being moved to evo, to me those are the quintessential conjurations to me.

All in all the standard magic system is the worst one in 3.5, there needed to be more support for other things. Psionics only really got 1 supplement, MoI got none, ToM got none (despite the widespread player interest in Binder). The real fix for continued use of the standard magic system started with Miniatures handbook, namely warmage, and continued with duskblade, Beguiler, and Dread Necromancer. What there needed to be was a superspecialist transmuter, conjurer, abjurer and diviner. There are enough other mage type classes to get just about any thought space covered, that they could drop wizard and sorcerer and the game would be better for the lack of batman.

List of classes that can stand in for wizard/sorc (with or without reflavor)

Class(what it replaces){comments}

Psion(either)
Erudite(wizard)
Beguiler(either)
Dragonfire adept(sorc)
Dread Necromancer(either)
Duskblade ({Gish without Prestige classes}(either)
Incarnate(wizard)
Binder(either, primarily wizard)
Wilder(sorc)
Shadow caster(either)
Truenamer{has it's issues, but it's not wizard}(wizard)
Warmage(either)
Warlock(sorc)
Wu jen(wizard)
Artificer(wizard)
Dragon shaman (sorc)
A common factor of many of these classes is fixed "spell" list, and most of these also have a tight focus. A Psion only has so many powers, limited by class lvl +dedicated feat expenditure. Dread necro, Warmage and duskblade all have very tightly focused spell list, and their expanded knowledge features don't really let them get out of their shtick. Beguiler is similar to the previous but less restricted, and generally useless once undead and constructs show up. Warlock, Dragon Shaman, and Dragonfire adept are not spell casters, strictly speaking, but can capture the flavor of Sorcerer without a lot of reflavor necessary, heck with wotc pushing the sorc dragon blood thing the shaman and adept fit flavor better than sorc. Wu Jen is kind of wizard all over again, except they have a much smaller pool of spells to write in their books, so it's a band-aid more than anything. Artificer can do the batman thing in more amusing way, given he will use a more literal utility belt. And ToM classes all present some mechanically interesting systems that could be reflavored to some wizard concepts.

Frog Dragon
2009-02-24, 03:26 PM
Well we could add the speel level too.'

Also playing with numbers.

A level 4 human wizard is next to an enemy fighter of equal levle
The wizard has a con of 14 (+2)
Maxxed Concentration (7 ranks)
and a minor item taht gives +2 to Concentration
for a +11 to Concentration

The fighter has Str 18 (+4)
A BaB of +4
A +1 Gretasword
for a +9 to attack

He wants to avoid AOO casting a level 2 spell.
The DC is 10+9+2 equaling a DC of 21
Wizard has a +11 to Concentration
meaning he needs a 10 or more to pass wihtout taking AOO from the fighter.

This seem sensible? Also I keyed it off enemy AB because it makes sense. A veteran combatant notices flaws in enemy defense easier than a novice.

lesser_minion
2009-02-24, 05:21 PM
Personally, I'd consider using the rules as:

If in melee, you need to make a concentration check, DC 15+ spell level. If you pass this, you are able to find an opening and begin your spell. Otherwise, you spend the whole round attempting to find a break, wating your action but keeping the spell.

Casting a spell - or attempting to cast a spell - still provokes an attack of opportunity. If this hits, your spell fails and is lost, even if it is established to deal no damage. The Combat Casting feat can avert spell miscasts due to an attack of opportunity.

Spellcasting actions are a special group of actions ("Spell Actions") which consume two standard actions, one on each of two rounds. You may move before and after both standard actions - walking is not taxing enough to cause difficulties in casting a spell.

Spells normally listed as swift actions are a swift action to cast, but the caster must spend a move action to recover his equilibrium for another spell. Other spells simply take an additional round to complete.

Spells which require melee touch attacks do not provoke opportunity attacks or interrupts if the original concentration check succeeds, and the attack of opportunity has no chance to destroy the spell.

Falling Out
2009-02-24, 05:50 PM
I am always in favour of LESS rolls where necessary. Throw out defensive casting.

I liked one of lesser_minion's suggestions - that Combat Casting = spell not lost if interrupted OR my suggestion is = +4 to AC when casting for AoO

To me, I like throwing out defensive casting completely. Let them take their AoO if they got themselves in that situation. IF they take damage THEN they make their concentration check of 10+damage.


Something else I contemplate - that Still Spell metamagic ignores AoO. Talking should not create AoO.

Falling Out
2009-02-24, 08:09 PM
Divine Magic

The PC asks for help from the deity and the deity (DM) responds. That means the player asks for help/strength/healing/smiting and the DM chooses how the deity would respond.

Thus again, no preset spell lists...but no real control over said spell list (save for good RP leading to desired result). The better the character words his request the closer he will get to desired result.

Obviously, a summoner-feat-heavy druid gets summons most of the time...but not always the type he wants...and perhaps every once in a while something else appropriate happens (Liveoak eg.) instead.

PinkysBrain
2009-02-24, 08:38 PM
Something else I contemplate - that Still Spell metamagic ignores AoO. Talking should not create AoO.
It's not the talking which causes the AoO, it's the complete lack of dodging.

DM assigning you spells you can cast? Oh god no ... that's so completely opposed to what D&D is about for most players ... why don't I just hand him my character sheet and let him play?

Draz74
2009-02-25, 01:41 AM
Ditch or lessen spell resistance. As it is now, it's not balancing, just annoying. Most 'Save or' spells either ignore it, or aren't bothered by it.

This. SR doesn't balance anything and its all-or-nothing effect is much too "swingy."

For a much better SR mechanic, see the Wilder's Volatile Mind (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/classes/wilder.htm#volatileMind) feature. Admittedly, this would be extremely difficult to adapt to prepared casters' spells or SLAs, but if you use a spell points system or even just have all casters spontaneous, something like this mechanic would be a better SR.

Even 4e's version of spell resistance (i.e. "better Fortitude, Reflex, and Will") is better than 3e's, though.

TSED
2009-02-25, 04:50 AM
I balanced save or dies by just making them do stat damage. (Necromantic SoDs = con damage, petrification = dex damage, etc. etc.)

I like the "no defensive casting" bit. I think I'll nab that one.

Still looking for a way to deal with Save or Sucks. I'm not particularly fond of that d4 thing (though it's better than nothing).




Buffs are easy to deal with: dispel magic. Alternately, make 'self only' buffs touch range. Why would the cleric cast X if he can cast it on the paladin? (Shhh, the +BAB things not important, shhh).