PDA

View Full Version : [3.5] Spell Balance



Paulus
2010-04-21, 12:50 AM
...or The Chronicles of a Drowning Man.

Recently in another thread I took on the foolish task of balancing all the spells in core in the manner Tome of Battle balanced maneuvers. This means adding prerequisites, and other such limitations so the the tiers of casters will be in effect, toppled down to that of the pinnacle of melee as we know it, that is the warblade with maneuvers.

This is not to say Maneuvers are absolutely balanced, but far more balanced than spells. Such would the evidence provided by the tier system suggest. Therefore, while I began my research into this seemingly insurmountable task a colleague of mine suggested I make this fully public and carefully poll the RP side of things. Thus, I present to you my current working process in hopes of making others aware of this inane project and to allow them to provide what ever comments, questions, or advice they wish. Can't guarantee I'll take, or even understand, most of it. But I feel I should at least offer everyone the chance to have a say. Besides it's not like I'll turn down free help. ha!

Here is the current situation of things which prompted Doc Roc to suggest I take this fully public.




[QUOTE=Doc Roc]
That's actually sort of a trap, in my experience, because it can devastate the entire party's ability to respond to certain threats. The problem with 3.x has to do, at a fundamental level, with the question of what the designers considered fun, and what they considered to be basically scut-work. And they gave most of the "scut-work" to the wizards and clerics. Unfortunately, the scut-work is both vital and very powerful, often things like see invisibility or solid fog.

Worse, simply locking a wizard out of a school has deeply unpredictable effects in core, because a lot of school utility is built around presumptions regarding the nature of opposition. For example, if you aren't gonna hit a lot of undead and outsiders, the enchantment school rises very considerably in worth.

The problem is that one cannot impose prescriptive rules on an existing system and expect it to respond in a simple fashion.

Mm yet Impose one must because clearly access to all schools is what makes the Casters so powerful, something avoided in Tome of Battle Maneuvers.

Also, the disparity present in valuing the schools honestly should be enforced. After all this is what I feel will make other classes more valuable, if they specialize in one area or another, having one along becomes more desirable in a certain campaign.

This is already evident in the way some classes work, a cleric is very handy in a heavy undead world, as they should be, and that separates the cleric and wizard in terms of who they are. But this does not mean you HAVE to have a cleric, a Druid would also work. Or if you want neither of them, then it should be up to what resources you HAVE to deal with the problem, in inventive ways. In other words a cleric would certainly help in this case but is not necessary because of what others know.

Making those separations stronger is what strengthens other classes. That is why a Warblade is stronger in certain situation then a Crusader, or sword sage stronger then a warblade and so fourth. yet none of them are absolutely stronger because none have access to all the schools. I feel this should be the first fundamental step in balancing out the power of casters, spreading the schools. Afterall, we are talking about balance here, and if we think of that, of course the thing with ALL the weights is going to be unbalanced compared to the other. In this case it is spells. and generally. schools.

I am currently at this stage in separating the schools by Core classes, and mainly by way of the core casting classes.


Wizard
Transmutation or Conjuration [All but Healing]
Evocation or Necromancy
Divination, Abjuration, Universal.

Sorcerer
Enchanting, Abjuration, Universal, Evocation or Necromancy

Bard
Illusion, Enchanting, Abjuration, Universal.

Cleric
Conjuration [Healing], Abjuration, Necromancy

Druid
Divination, Conjuration [Healing], Abjuration
Transmutation or Conjuration or Evocation


Do you see what I mean? We know the most broken schools are ones used together, Summoning monsters and changing into monsters ones self can totally break a game. So, a separation between them seems logical. So is this true for evocation and necromancy, though to a lesser extent because all three are schools based on 'attacking' Evocation through forceful spells, Conjuration through inserting other combatants, and transmutation through changing one's self into other combatants.

I feel going by the already in place level restrictions, alignment restrictions, and letting the separations that already exist stay there (such as druid versions of spells vs. wizard versions etc) there is already a little balance. This is only where I am currently however and I expect to go much deeper. I know it is a blanket effect and will cause a lot of little snares and problems... but if Tome of Battle is any example, I think there IS a way. This is only a first step, but I will still make this step.




As you can see, separating the schools is a rather big step. Simply because it would immediately bring all casters who had complete access to all spells down in power a fair few steps. Also I well know outright I will be challenged very strongly. Mostly because I do not hold a great deal of understanding of spells, how they mesh and how certain things collide entirely. However I do realize that the broken combos are even more broken when usable by a single class. Spreading this broken-ness over several classes at least limits it's ease in breaking, but it would at least promote team work as well, even if just to use the broken bits.

Further: My current reasoning.
Wizard

Transmutation or Conjuration [All but Healing]
Evocation or Necromancy
Divination, Abjuration, Universal.

We all know polymorph can be easily abused, so too can conjuration to summon help. These two skills alone can negate most melee characters simply by the fact they mirror the opposition one may face, fighting fire with fire is easy if you are fire or have fire for friends. Therefore, a choice between the two is a logical step, in that if you consider mastering summoning several beasts or becoming several beasts, fundamentally requires the same amount of knowledge of these beasties. Therefore while you may have all the knowledge you need of these beasties, and being quite the mytho-zoologist that you are, how you apply such knowledge is the key.

The ideal Wizard that we all know and love, leaning on a wooden staff, wearing nothing but a robe and sneering at those in armor, Brings to us the question of why such a person is like that. Well, why sneer at the pinnacle of human perfection (if the typical Wizard be human) if something were more then human or knew of things more then human. No "conjurer of cheap tricks" here, he summons demons. Or in that, just as worse, becomes a demon. Yet to do both, would seem nigh all powerful, and since we are not making a god but a wizard, let us squeak down that power a bit and only have it be a choice of one of the two. Because if one thinks about it, they are two sides of the same coin.

"Why beg for help from monsters when you can become a monster?"
Vs.
"Why become a monster when I can force monsters to serve me?"

It depends on your point of view. From an RP perspective you can enrich it anyway you want, but balance wise, having both sides of the same coin is too rich.

As for Evocation and Necromancy, naturally we have all heard of the dark wizard. One who deals in death, in black robes with legions of corpses at his sway. Yet, we have also heard of the wizard who masters the elements of energy and can wield lighting at his finger tips. However... to do both? Again whom gods toes doth step. I feel it is a better thing to separate, such abilities in that a Necromancer seems more in tune of controlling the energies of life and death, where as an Evoker seems in tune with controlling the energies of the elements.

And while one may argue that "what are life and death if not natural forces such as the elements?" this would only serve to enforce the separation of the schools and of mastering them. Consider the strain of learning to master the energies of life and death and each element of the natural world. Why such things would take considerable study for every single one! But you say, it IS possible, and of course it is. Therefore I see it plausible to say a Wizard could learn both Necromancy and Evocation... but in doing so would certainly take up a lot of time and energy away from... say... becoming or summoning other beings.

So while you could have a Transmuting Necromancer or a Conjuring Evoker, or even a Transmuting Evoker or Conjuring Necromancer or a Evoking Necromancer, you could not have a Transmuting Evoking Necromancer or Conjuring Necromantic Evoker and so forth. That's simply too much power to place into one being, almost, godly.

Finally, Wizards are well know for their preparation, in fact it can be said to be their strongest ability. To KNOW that which they may need to know to handle any situation. Therefore I see no reason why they should not be the best, if not the only, diviners. This I'll allow as the strongest link to their... divinity. I also see no trouble in giving them Abjuration, especially if they should choose conjuration. What is more, what caster investing in magic alone wouldn't wish to learn to protect themselves? and further not allowing Universal seems slightly pointless as there are so few spells within it, it would seem easy to learn to master their energies. Using such energies is almost a universal ability in magic you might say.


Sorcerer

Evocation or Necromancy
Enchanting, Abjuration, Universal,

I figure the Sorcerer deserved to be more of an Evoker then a Wizard, mainly because that is what he is most known for, "Lightning bolt! Lightning bolt!", which as the majority would have me believe, is dumb "because direct damage sucks". However, not so much to be scoffed at when they are the second half of the only two classes who can use the school. Yet still without only either Evocation or Necromancer they seem terrible in comparison to the Wizard, but, not if the Sorcerer -famous for his amazing charisma- was quite an enchanting individual. They may not be able to summon other worldly beasties, or become them. But they can ensorcell people like nobodies business, except a sorcerer's business, and business is good. Why you might say their charm is a very charming thing.

One could argue that a Wizard would be one among the type to dominate, or subvert someone's will by sheer will alone as they have been, but this only argues that a Sorcerer whose charisma makes him a force of personality to be reckoned with. Besides a Wizard is more Int based then Wis based, so he doesn't have much of a high will to start over throwing other's wills, unless you count the wills of those he may summon. He could certainly, but why give them more awesomeness then they already have? In this way the Wizard no longer overshadows the Sorcerer so much, and the Sorcerer no longer stays in the Wizard's shadow as a lesser caster simply because he can use his Charisma spawned powers to greater effect than a Wizard ever could.


Bard

Illusion, Enchanting, Conjuration [healing], Abjuration.

Now bards themselves almost have a reputation for being spoony. Low on the tiers simply because they lack focus and or can be spread too far very easily. The best fifth member of any party? Jack of all trades? Yes, they are at that. But, the way they do so perhaps may be in better light if we give them a singular powerful ability. And I don't mean enchantment, though of course a bard becomes very powerful if he is the other half of only two classes that can use enchantments. Also being know for his enchanting and charming performances, but more so, his playful use of illusion!

Simple tricks to jeer or cheer, made awesome by the sheer power invested into them. A Bard while lacking in pure power to destroy, become a monster, call monsters (or beasts), or even lacking the powers to raise the dead gloomy gloom, emo though they may choose to be, they DO have the power to mimic such things! Bare in mind Shadow evocation and conjuration. One could even say it is unbelievable that a bard could hold such power and if they look closely they will notice the power to be sheer illusion, but Illusions can be a very powerful thing... like ideas. They can move, or even harm you, like any good music. Though they can not evoke bolts of lightning nor balls of fire, they can sing about them... or speak, orate, act and though the illusion of presentation comment on the illusion of such power and the power in that itself.

Certainly a Wizard or Sorcerer may indeed recognize the powers of illusion, but why settle for illusion when one has the power to create or bend reality itself? Of course, Bards may not be all powerful as that but they can punch you in the face and then heal you! "How's that for reality?"



Cleric

Conjuration [Healing], Abjuration, Necromancy, Divination.

Ah one of two in the CoDzilla. The mightiest of beasts. Mock not the holy man who shall place his holy heel where one might exclaim (and can find) "holy sh**t!" Yes Clerics are certainly powerful in their melee ability, bolstered by their ability to heal you the very next minute only to hurt you with that same power. A cleric has more then enough aid upstairs from gods themselves to need the power to become a god themselves.

Their primary abilities over life and death should shame the wizard, as Clerics are the pinnacle of Divine power in the mortal world. That being said. They could use a little more humility. Let them heal, or destroy life through conjuration [healing] and necromancy, let them too protect themselves and others through Abjuration. And more, let them divine such that they may need to know, for who better to communicate with the divine then those who do it regularly? But let them not need the power to evoke the very powers of the gods and become nearly gods themselves! Such is blasphemy! It is not enough that they hold the most power over life and death that they must more be able to deal it out in either way magical and physical?

Certainly a deity would protect their follower, and even imbue them with powers beyond mere mortals, even physically, but why do so when they can imbue them with the powers to know what would threaten them, protect themselves via replenishing their health or preventing damage, and defeat their foes through channeling pure death itself?

There is clearly enough power here then need be bolstered through allowing them to perfect their physicality through divine means. Clerics, I feel, should be spreading healing and the word of life and death itself more then smacking things with divine fury... after all, that's what a Paladin's for.


Druid

Divination, Conjuration [Healing], Abjuration
Transmutation or Conjuration or Evocation

Ah the druid. Those tree hugging frolic through the fields metal is bad, except in music, happy fairy fun times folk... who can change into a beasty and tear your face off if you DON'T "watch out for that tree". Only they can prevent forest fires by directing them at you instead.

It is not enough that they can change into magical beasties that would do far more then ruin your picnic, but they also have one with them at all times, which they can THEN change into even worse beasties to ruin your parade. Why then would beings, who are so intune with the natural world and transforming themselves and everything else around them, need to call even more beasties to wreck your lovely day?

Certainly they know HOW to. They know all about the Call of the Wild, but to be able to become one, AND make your friend become one too... it seems triply unfair to be able to call another. And on TOP of becoming a beasty, making their friend who is a beasty an even worse beasty, they can harness the already harnessed forces of nature and throw lightening at you... while being one of those aforementioned beasties! Now if that isn't the epitome of nature going wild I don't know what it.

You'd think with all of the natural forces under the Druid's command they wouldn't need more protection or to know what is coming after them. But they have that as well. AND they can even heal themselves if for some insane reason whose ever day they are ruining is more then a match for them. Maybe a rival druid? "Forrest suck, go Desserts!" But in any case. It is simply far too much nature to squeeze into one little being, why else would they change their shape so much?

The sheer infinity of possible shapes provided naturally in nature is staggering. So it would seem learning all of them would take time away from other natural forces, such as the elements. There is nature and then there is nature. The storm, the winds, fire, lightening, Natural forces which the beastes simply can not 'eat nor tear'. While a druid would certainly always have the power to change their shape, I think it more plausible that they would be very taxed about embodying the natural forces as well as learning even more shapes to change things into or for that matter, summon such natural things. So either summon the forces of nature in the elements, the beasts, or in yourself. Augmenting the already potent power of the Druid to change form regardless, but, not do all four at once. Nature is change itself, embodied by the druid but there is only so much change one being can handle without going mad. Hence the need for great wisdom, but not great intelligence. Afterall, they are only dumb animals. right? As are we all.

Naturally, in nature, a Druid would find means to protect themselves so Abjuration is alright, so too is Divination- for the Druid is wise in the ways of balance, the balance of nature, cause and effect. As ripples in the pond alert the fish, or the change in the wind alerts the wolf, or the coolness in the air alerts the bear of winter. A druid is wise in the sensing which way the wind blows, and the reasons in the changing of the season. So I see no reason why divination should ever be forgot.

Well... that is all I have on my reasoning for lessening the amazing power of beings to just slightly less amazing. I do realize that peoples opinions will differ, and such things can be reworded anyway they want to achieve what they want. After all, that is why the 3.5 core is what it is in the first place and why I am changing it instead of making it. Yet I think there is a fair amount to be said about cutting the number of schools a class has access to. Simply because it makes sense in that we clearly define the lines between the classes and in that, clearly define the classes.

If you are going to be a druid you want to be a druid. Not a Wizard who loves nature. Though you certainly could be a wizard who loves nature. But it wouldn't be the same as being a druid. After all, if it was, why have a Druid and a Wizard? why not just have a wizard who can do anything? oh... wait... aaaaaanyway. I've written enough. This is my thought process on splitting the schools and in that, separating the classes and in THAT, balancing them against each other, improving their worth, and lowering some of the tiers. Not destroying them perhaps... but rather, making those low tiers more valuable. so the level playing field is a filed in which one would actually want to play.

I can't promise I will fix everything, I can't even promise I won't fail in only balancing core as I am trying to do. Bahamut, I can't even promise I won't give up because there is quite a lot to fix (seriously, have you looked at this stuff? lololol) But I wish to try. Because I love the game and think it is something worth trying. So please, don't be too harsh on me here. I'm not arrogant enough to think I know everything and will undoubtedly miss or not understand quite a lot. But... I haven't seen it done before. I think I can try. And if I succeed...? I'm only trying to have some fun, do some good, and you can always completely ignore what I'm doing. It won't ever be published. It probably won't even ever step outside these forums, massive epic failure that it may turn out to be, but hey. This is a playground and this project is my sand castle, it could use a few decorations... it's going to be quite big... that is, if the ocean (the spells and material I'm using to harden my sand) doesn't drown it and me first.

Please forgive any spelling or grammar mistakes, I don't mean to make them, I simply just don't see them when I'm writing... and Thank you for your time and your reading if you did, I'd hate to have drowned you in text!

Koury
2010-04-21, 01:47 AM
In my humble opinion:

You're doing it wrong.

So, under the proposed system I can no longer break the game in any way I choose. Instead of being able to Gate in X and Shapechange into Z, I must choose one or the other.

The broken spell effects are what need to be redone, not the way they are accessed.

Paulus
2010-04-21, 01:58 AM
In my humble opinion:

You're doing it wrong.

So, under the proposed system I can no longer break the game in any way I choose. Instead of being able to Gate in X and Shapechange into Z, I must choose one or the other.

The broken spell effects are what need to be redone, not the way they are accessed.

That's why this is only the first step.

TheMadLinguist
2010-04-21, 02:05 AM
Why not rebalance the spells first, then regroup them after you have them together? It seems like you're going to reallocate them after they're rebalanced anyway; might as well do less work.

Koury
2010-04-21, 02:05 AM
So, your first step is to force casters to drop schools? Why not begin where the problem actually is? Overpowered spell effects. If you do that properly it will be not only the first step, but the only step needed to 'fix' Wizards.

cheezewizz2000
2010-04-21, 02:06 AM
In my signature, there is a link to a HB sorcerer varient that a friend of mine came up with, and I posted to these boards. It's not exactly what you are looking for, but it is similar in that it resricts access to all schools for sorcs in favour of increased versatility and power within one or two schools. Probably low teir 2/high teir 3, but the aim was to give a sorcerer somthing beyond spell progression pre-pathfinder, rather than to power it down.

As I say it is not exactly what you're looking for, but it may have one or two ideas that you could use/adapt. The link is to "sorcerous talent".

Edit: Also, much praise and adulation. Even if this project does not get completed, no doubt many helpful insights will be made and much will be gained. I shall follow your career with great interest!

Gan The Grey
2010-04-21, 02:32 AM
I both agree and disagree with you, Koury. I agree that the spells DO need to be reworked, but I also believe that much of a spellcaster's power lies in their EXTREME versatility. Even through specialization, a wizard is not really a specialist. A diviner is not really a diviner. They still have far too much versatility.

I will say this. I like the way he separates the schools out, but I would separate them further by allowing them (wizards) only three schools plus universal. Really make those wizards work for their 'ultimate power'.

Paulus
2010-04-21, 02:34 AM
Why not rebalance the spells first, then regroup them after you have them together? It seems like you're going to reallocate them after they're rebalanced anyway; might as well do less work.

A valid point; if I start rebalancing spells I'm starting as small as possible and making one spell balanced, but against what? and who can use it? And this is only the research phase honestly, I'm not really touching anything aside from the idea. I'm going off of Tome of Battle's maneuvers as a large part of balancing the system, classes having access to all schools would break ToB as it has clearly broken every splat book and core itself. Therefore, starting somewhere sweeping is my attempt at first fundamentally understanding the schools of magic as they are before I begin changing the spells themselves. Some spells just don't fit into their school. Like Conjuration Shiled when it should be Abjuration. In doing that I gain a better understanding of the spells and also begin to solve a major problem of classes having too many spells to choose from.

And believe me it may seem like less work to start messing with spells alone, but I'd run into a large snare of splitting the schools anyway, and already splitting them will eliminate a lot of the problem spells altogether. Such as Divine power. In this way I wouldn't need to fix what isn't there. You see? In theory, I'll be cutting a lot of spells off a lot of lists. So when I go back to those lists they will be smaller and can be added too from the 'normal' list as needed to balance.

But right now, I'm looking at the RP perspective of doing so, so I won't need to worry about it later. because I could mess with spells all I want and then find out I wasted my time because when I tried to split the schools with the new spells they simply didn't fit the classes flavor wise, or there was a better way I missed. It would be less work to go Spells, Schools, classes in the short term, presumably, but if I go Schools, Classes, Spells... then the hardest parts will be over.

and besides there are a lot of spell fixes out there already for specific spells which I can reference from for my research but not much out there on separating the schools and the reason for doing so logically, flavorfully, and gametasticaly. I hope to at least begin such a thing in my research as was suggested by a colleague.



So, your first step is to force casters to drop schools? Why not begin where the problem actually is? Overpowered spell effects. If you do that properly it will be not only the first step, but the only step needed to 'fix' Wizards.

Not necessarily, see above, and remember. If I only fixed spells, one would only need to look for more options to break other spells. If you limit schools those options become less and less available. It also strengthens the classes individuality in their means of style and play and such. Also, I am not trying to fix wizards, nor fighters, nor any other single class. But spells themselves. With ToB as reference. The mechanic is off. Wizards aren't the problem, being the sum of their spells, therefore to lessen their overall power a good place to start is to lessen their access to schools as ToB did with styles, and as classes further down their tier have proven through their smaller spell selection. Lessen spell selection and you lessen power. The greatest way to lessen spell selection is to separate the schools. This may be termed a forceful outright ban, but it is within reason and supported by flavor. At least that's the idea of this thread.

I later plan to go through each 'broken spell' as they exist in the schools and make them comparable to power based on class power, schools they have access too, and the ever broken combos, to seek out why they are so broken and lessen them. Either through duration, target, action or prerequisite of other spells as we have seen done with boosts, strikes, counters, and such in ToB. If needed. Though terminology would suggest Buff, Debuff/Strike, and Utility. but that is later, right now I'm trying not to be overwhelmed.

I may also be doing it wrong... but since all the other ways doing it right haven't seemed to work to my knowledge (since I haven't see them suggested on the forum or elsewhere when such threads come up. yet.) I will gladly do it wrong and accept being ignored. I can at least say I tried when ever I rail against how broken spell casting it.


In my signature, there is a link to a HB sorcerer varient that a friend of mine came up with, and I posted to these boards. It's not exactly what you are looking for, but it is similar in that it resricts access to all schools for sorcs in favour of increased versatility and power within one or two schools.

As I say it is not exactly what you're looking for, but it may have one or two ideas that you could use/adapt. The link is to "sorcerous talent".

I make a point of mentioning, in other posts, how invocations seemed to be an attempt at balance and how psionics is considered pretty balanced due to power points and their availability being a limiting factor. However I've always had a distaste for point pool systems in the manner of reducing immersion and though I don't hate them, I think as Tome of Battle has shown us, there are ways of getting around to balance without points/power point pools. However I WILL look into his work, simply because if points are a limiting factor there may be a correlation in valuing spells via point cost that could aid me in my work. So thank you, I could definitely use it... if I can get around to it without drowning first. heh.


I both agree and disagree with you, Koury. I agree that the spells DO need to be reworked, but I also believe that much of a spellcaster's power lies in their EXTREME versatility. Even through specialization, a wizard is not really a specialist. A diviner is not really a diviner. They still have far too much versatility.

I will say this. I like the way he separates the schools out, but I would separate them further by allowing them (wizards) only three schools plus universal. Really make those wizards work for their 'ultimate power'.

Ah but, in your opinion, in what way? What schools should they be allowed and why? if you don't mind me asking. In effect I am only allowing the wizard the choice of being able to change into something or call something, have his own attack spells, and protect himself through abjuration/divination with universal thrown in. If one wish to change into something they can't call something, if they throw lightning and fire they can't throw negative levels. Or if they wish to throw lightening and fire and negative levels they can neither change into nor call something else. Plus they can't travel or have much utility either. Abjuration is a very defensive minded school with attacks being limited to dimensions summons and dispelling, which is handy for the conjurer, but not so much for the Transmuter.

Whereas Conjurer, Transmuter, Evoker or Necromancer benefit from abjuration's protections such as amor and shields and protections. I could see it to either choose between Conjuration or Transmutation OR Evocation or Necromancy and not allow one from each if you think that would be better. But, would it? This is the kind of input I'm looking for as well. I'm not looking for agreement or disagreement per say' but rather views, opinions, and additions or subtractions to what I'm going off of in my own fool head. Otherwise, why do this if other people can't have fun with it too?

Koury
2010-04-21, 02:39 AM
I will say this. I like the way he separates the schools out, but I would separate them further by allowing them (wizards) only three schools plus universal. Really make those wizards work for their 'ultimate power'.

Focused Specialists only get 5/8 schools, plus Universal.

Limiting options is not the solution, in my opinion. Wizards are supposed to be versatile. They are supposed to be able to help in any given situation. The problem is that the spells enable them not only able to help, but able to complete tasks single-handedly. Fix that issue, and the other tend to go away.

Koury
2010-04-21, 02:44 AM
I'm going off of Tome of Battle's maneuvers as a large part of balancing the system, classes having access to all schools would break ToB as it has clearly broken every splat book and core itself.

Unsupported. Master of Nine, in fact, has access to all disciplines. I'm pretty sure it isn't difficult to get every single level 9 maneuver on one character, and that that character would not be overpowered.

Paulus
2010-04-21, 02:50 AM
Unsupported. Master of Nine, in fact, has access to all disciplines. I'm pretty sure it isn't difficult to get every single level 9 maneuver on one character, and that that character would not be overpowered.

Unsupported perhaps, but not entirely. It is supported by the fact classes have access to a single school others do not, and that the master of nine is a prestige class, meaning one would have to take a lot of the other classes and thereby gain access to the class only styles before becoming a master of nine.

A wizard is not a prestige class, it is a single class. And it had access to all schools without having to be other class either. Also, a character having access to all level nine powers not being overpowered is due to the nature of maneuvers, how they were split up by prereqs, duration, and use. This needs to be done with spells, which I intend to do later.

Also, just to note. Be careful, double posting is against forum rules, just letting you know if no body else has. You seem to do it a lot, can be easy to do though I know, still, be careful. Last I checked you could be reprimanded for doing it to much. :smallsmile:

EDIT:

Focused Specialists only get 5/8 schools, plus Universal.

Limiting options is not the solution, in my opinion. Wizards are supposed to be versatile. They are supposed to be able to help in any given situation. The problem is that the spells enable them not only able to help, but able to complete tasks single-handedly. Fix that issue, and the other tend to go away.

by the way, the wizard is STILL versatile. He still has access to more schools then the other classes, and ease in doing so!

Koury
2010-04-21, 03:15 AM
Unsupported perhaps, but not entirely. It is supported by the fact classes have access to a single school others do not, and that the master of nine is a prestige class, meaning one would have to take a lot of the other classes and thereby gain access to the class only styles before becoming a master of nine. Master of Nine is accessable at what, level 7? Two classes is hardly 'a lot'.

Human Warblade 5/Swordsage 1
Adaptive Style [Human]
Imp. Unarmed Strike [Level 1]
Blindfight [Level 3]
Imp. Init. [Warblade 5]
Dodge [Level 6]


A wizard is not a prestige class, it is a single class. And it had access to all schools without having to be other class either. Also, a character having access to all level nine powers not being overpowered is due to the nature of maneuvers, how they were split up by prereqs, duration, and use. This needs to be done with spells, which I intend to do later.

Half agree. It is certianly due to the nature of the maneuvers, yes. They are not overpowered because the effects they create are not overpowered. Simple as that.

Strip them of their prereqs (sans level prereqs) and apply Wizards vancian approach to them and the Wizard will be fine. The reason? The effects are not overpowered.


Also, just to note. Be careful, double posting is against forum rules, just letting you know if no body else has. You seem to do it a lot, can be easy to do though I know, still, be careful. Last I checked you could be reprimanded for doing it to much. :smallsmile:

Yes, thank you. I am new around here.

Paulus
2010-04-21, 03:33 AM
Master of Nine is accessable at what, level 7? Two classes is hardly 'a lot'.

Human Warblade 5/Swordsage 1
Adaptive Style [Human]
Imp. Unarmed Strike [Level 1]
Blindfight [Level 3]
Imp. Init. [Warblade 5]
Dodge [Level 6]


Master of nine is still a prestige class, which means you'd have a class made up of three classes to get access to all styles, and even then not in a way a Wizard has access to all schools and a wizard is only one class. Three classes is a lot more then one. Maybe not a whole lot, but, more then one in any case. Still not trying to just fix the wizard though.



Half agree. It is certianly due to the nature of the maneuvers, yes. They are not overpowered because the effects they create are not overpowered. Simple as that.

Strip them of their prereqs (sans level prereqs) and apply Wizards vancian approach to them and the Wizard will be fine. The reason? The effects are not overpowered.


I would include the prerequisites needed to reach the higher level maneuvers, the way they are categorized of use via boosts, counters, strikes etc, as more of a balancing factor then the power of the maneuvers themselves. Suppose we can half agree to half disagree them. But by all means if I find that spells don't need prerequisites etc aside from what is already in place, hooray! less work for me! I'll still have to do more research first though. Besides like I said, it's already been done, but not the way I'm doing it. As far as I know and if you believe I'm doing it wrong, that's your opinion which you are entitled too. I'll still do what hasn't been done, as far as I've seen, because what has been done hasn't fixed it. yet. AFAIK.



Yes, thank you. I am new around here.

No worries, be sure to read the rules and guidelines for posting! and welcome!

Roc Ness
2010-04-21, 04:05 AM
Hey Paulus! :smallbiggrin:
Are you sure you might not be biting off a bit more than you can chew here? I don't think the spell school restrictions are going to help anything by itself, and there is a huge number of Core spells to correct if you were to undertake that. That said, its nice to see that somebody is trying to tackle this problem, and I shall watch with interest. :smallsmile:

An idea I would like to add, however:
Warlock invocations, as you have said, are a start to balancing things. Maybe you could sorta build on that with spells? Y'know how there are many spells that are basicly more powerful versions of existing spells, or simply similar in fluff? (eg. Fly - Overland Flight, Fireball - Delayed Fireball, Wings of Cover & Wings of Flurry, etc.)

My point is, maybe you could turn them into weaker "invocations" that scale with your level (dimension door -> teleport) and are usable whenever you want. In order to limit them to a few choices as you wished, you could say they only can have a few "invocations" ready and usable at once. Some, like Teleport, you won't have to change because of the limited choices they wouldn't be prepared often except when required. Others, like glitterdust, may need editing to become far less powerful, and some, like magic missile, are iconic enough to need some sort of level scaling. In addition, you can tag prereqs to the invocations (Fireball=Requires one evocation) :smallwink:

However, to preserve versatility so often tagged to casters, you can allow them to switch "active" invocations with, say, a full round action (akin swordsage), allowing them to fight with Transmutations, then find a trap, spend six seconds in focus, and then be able to summon a rat to trigger the trap. :smallbiggrin:


Also, err... I think Koury was being sarcastic there about being new. If you would look at his join date you'll find he's been here four years longer than you...

Paulus
2010-04-21, 04:21 AM
Hi Roc Ness!

EDIT: oop you edit ninjaed me!


Hey Paulus! :smallbiggrin:
Are you sure you might not be biting off a bit more than you can chew here? I don't think the spell school restrictions are going to help anything by itself, and there is a huge number of Core spells to correct if you were to undertake that. That said, its nice to see that somebody is trying to tackle this problem, and I shall watch with interest.

Oh no I know exactly the scope of my folly, hence the Chronicles of a Drowning man. There are 608 in core alone, so I've heard. But I've been sitting around grumbling about casting and all these 'Wizard=god' 'fix the fighter cuz he can't do anything against caster at all' threads and found each one trying to fix the fighter incomparable to a Wizard, or any full caster for that matter. I realized long ago it can't be the wizard, because other full casters can do it too. In fact the comparison to pure power equaling closer to full caster made me think "perhaps spells are to blame?"

Spell school splits won't fix everything, and perhaps not even anything, but they do at least allow from limitations on casters as ToB has done with melee to 'fix melee' in a lot of people opinions. If it can be done in ToB it can be done with the normal spells. Firstly by splitting schools to limit access and promote character individuality and strength through difference. Tear down the tiers, level the playing the field at the very least to the oft considered pinnacle of melee, the Warblade. In theory. But. That, is, a, lot, of, spells. Hence the reference to one of my Favorite Primus Songs. None the less, welcome aboard. Take a seat, have some popcorn, I assure you this shall be glorious, one way or another.



An idea I would like to add, however:
Warlock invocations, as you have said, are a start to balancing things. Maybe you could sorta build on that with spells? Y'know how there are many spells that are basicly more powerful versions of existing spells, or simply similar in fluff? (eg. Fly - Overland Flight, Fireball - Delayed Fireball, Wings of Cover & Wings of Flurry, etc.)
My point is, maybe you could turn them into weaker "invocations" that scale with your level and are usable whenever you want. In order to limit them to a few choices, you could say they only can have a few "invocations" ready and usable at once, however, to preserve off-combat versatility, you can allow them to switch "active" invocations with, say, a full round action, allowing them to fight with Transmutations, then find a trap, spend six seconds in focus, and then be able to summon a rat to trigger the trap.


That is kind of where I was going actually. Invocations are split into 24 hour buffs for utility and protection and in other instances, debuffs, attacks, or utility period. Using Invocations as a power guide - since if it works for invocations it can work for other spells- I can begin adding prerequisites and categorizations to spells for Action, Duration, and use. Just like Strikes, Boosts, Counters, and Stances.

I also plan to have lines of spells in their own schools be accessible only if you have the first one first, like prerequisites, such as Lightning Bolt before Chain Lightening and so on or some version of this. But first. Limit Access like ToB did. Cut power immensely. Individualize classes with reasons that make sense and flavor. Then once the schools are irons out, and the fat is cut, I can start working on the schools themselves and balancing them against each other.

Still only the research stage, but at least it is a beginning!



Also, err... I think Koury was being sarcastic there about being new. If you would look at his join date...

It's 5 in the morning, I am immune to sarcasm this early/late. Also, new or not he was still double posting which can still get him in trouble. At least it could last I read the rules, might have changed since. Dunno. But better safe then sorry.

Roc Ness
2010-04-21, 05:34 AM
EDIT: oop you edit ninjaed me!

Sorry... I do that a lot. :smalleek::smallredface:

Emmerask
2010-04-21, 07:04 AM
I also plan to have lines of spells in their own schools be accessible only if you have the first one first, like prerequisites, such as Lightning Bolt before Chain Lightening and so on or some version of this.


Quite a huge task^^
Some random thoughts:

Your prereq change only really effects spont casters wizards only would have to spend a bit more money on adding spell x to their known list to get y. So for the other casters to be effected I would suggest that they need to memorize spell x in order to memorize spell y.
It would be quite hard to keep track of that so a helping spellbook program would be a good idea I think. If the spelllist with the preqs is finished and I have time I could do it as a java application, or setup a repository for the playground to create it cooperatively.

And for the school balance the most obvious I think would be Orb of x, melfs etc -> evocation

Tehnar
2010-04-21, 12:19 PM
I find your idea interesting in concept. Most fantasy necromancers don't turn people to sheep, but drain their life force / turn them into undead, etc. So it seems like a really cool concept.

However, and this is all my opinion, is assigning schools to classes should be the last step in the process.

I think that at first you want to think what level of magical ability are you looking at. Versatile but weak? Strong but specialized? That does stuff that can't be replicated by anything other then spells (and by this I mean a metagame effect; fireballing or hacking something to death with a weapon is pretty much the same thing in metagame terms, teleporting and walking is more diverse).

Secondly I would revise how spells are cast. For example a review of the concentration skill, and is spellcasting hampered by being prone. Interaction of armor and that sort of thing.

Once you have that down, I would edit/add spells as needed to schools that match my criteria. For example if you want your games such that cliffs and ravines pose a problem, I would make the fly spell to be duration: concentration up to 1min/level. Another good thing would be to give a serious review of metamagic reducers, and the ability to influence magical effects already in place.

Satisfied with that I would assign schools to classes, and modify classes as needed.

PlzBreakMyCmpAn
2010-04-21, 03:18 PM
Now bards themselves almost have a reputation for being spoony. I see what you did there. Old School like a Pro :smallbiggrin:


So, your first step is to force casters to drop schools? Why not begin where the problem actually is? Overpowered spell effects. If you do that properly it will be not only the first step, but the only step needed to 'fix' Wizards.Mmmmm tasty. Why haven't you commented on my Dirty Handbook Fixes at BG? this is what you long for :smallsmile:

Manditory plug: Yes I and the other min/maxers have already fixed most everything really broken in 3.5 (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=3288.0)

I'm always looked for ways to nerf casters. Restricting schools sounds so arbitrary it could be fun. The more things are restricted, the better when it comes to naughty casters trying to break your campaign.

The eight schools of arcane magic are abjuration, conjuration, divination, enchantment, evocation, illusion, necromancy, transmutation and universal. There are 15 base classes that cast full arcane or divine spells, but many are niche-based. Also keep in mind that schools are very unequal between arcane and divine. An arcane healer wouldn't be so hot.


archivist: illusion
*beguiler: enchantment
*cleric: abjuration and universal
dread necromancer: necromancy
*druid: conjuration except (healing)
*favored souls: enchantment
*healer: both arcane and divine conjuration (healing)
*mystics: divination and necromancy
*shaman: transmutation
shugenja: divination
*spirit shaman: illusion
sorcerer: conjuration except (healing)
warmage: evocation
wizard: abjuration and universal
wu-jen: transmutation

The above is an approximation. Some things would have to be adjusted like domain spells just being ordinary spell slots, etc. UMD would need trickle-down nerfing.

The half-casters: [6]bard w/o sublime chord, [5]duskblade, hexblade, paladin (all but one variants have small lists), ranger ([5]the variant has a small list), and spell-thief (NPC [5]adepts seem optional) should be allowed more but I'm not going to take the time with them. Its still nearly balanced before the full casters get 8th or 9th level spells if there are no fast casters.

Any Prestige classes that have their own casting either give their relation to the above base class casting (just mix and match the aspects, eg. beholder mages would have both wizard and sorc options) or have their own small lists.

Comments on the curb-stomp nerf?

Paulus
2010-04-21, 05:45 PM
Quite a huge task^^
Some random thoughts:

Your prereq change only really effects spont casters wizards only would have to spend a bit more money on adding spell x to their known list to get y. So for the other casters to be effected I would suggest that they need to memorize spell x in order to memorize spell y.
It would be quite hard to keep track of that so a helping spellbook program would be a good idea I think. If the spelllist with the preqs is finished and I have time I could do it as a java application, or setup a repository for the playground to create it cooperatively.

And for the school balance the most obvious I think would be Orb of x, melfs etc -> evocation

That's why it is more imperative to cut out what schools they have access o first. It's a large portion of the list. And less schools means less magic meaning less power. Spont casters would indeed suffer from the and that would drop them lower down the tier, and closer to the pinnacle of melee as we know it the Warblade/ToB stuff.

A wizard is still the king of versatility at this point and still has access to more spells for that matter, paying more or not. Yet before I tackle the actual prereqs for each spells, I feel it necessary to balance the schools against each other, and for that I need an approximation of power for each schools that fits well under the classes that would use them. Its the opposite of what Tome of Battle did, but I feel it should be done this way because the work already exists. There are thousands of spells. But only eight schools. So really it IS starting off smaller to work with the schools.

If you cut certain schools from the use of other classes Such as Evocation from Clerics, BAM, suddenly you have no more Codzilla because Divine power is GONE. That makes one less spell I need to balance, and or, can add later to balance, where as if I BEGIN by balancing all these spells and THEN cut schools, I will be wasting effort on the spells which would be cut automatically. But more important is the REASON for the cuts. So it isn't just a outright ban, but supported by flavor, strengthening individuality, and character class. I'm not adding anything that isn't already there, just "spreading the wealth" of spells characters have and reminding everybody that it really should be harder to cast all these spells then you'd think. Especially if you try to learn entire schools.

I mean a wizard is smart yes... but to make every wizard have total access and mastery of all schools is like... someone in the real world mastering Mathematics, Arts, Sciences, Histories, Languages, AND athletics. But none the less, this is only phase zero and researching opinions. I'd gladly take you up on your offer once it is done, if it even gets done, but don't wait up for me. heh. Thanks again!



I find your idea interesting in concept. Most fantasy necromancers don't turn people to sheep, but drain their life force / turn them into undead, etc. So it seems like a really cool concept.

However, and this is all my opinion, is assigning schools to classes should be the last step in the process.

I think that at first you want to think what level of magical ability are you looking at. Versatile but weak? Strong but specialized? That does stuff that can't be replicated by anything other then spells (and by this I mean a metagame effect; fireballing or hacking something to death with a weapon is pretty much the same thing in metagame terms, teleporting and walking is more diverse).

Exactly, there is nothing wrong with focus. Especially since you can completely disregard whatever I do and use core as you like. Gaining a understanding of the schools and the spells within them and then putting what schools most likely fit the flavor and idea of the class as they are is more important then making the schools in and of them selves balanced at this point, because it can save me a lot of work in the long run, and it has already been done with single spells themselves. Balancing the hundreds of spells that i need to against each other will be much easier when I know to whom they are going to, how they could use them, and WHY they should be changed because 'they don't fit the flavor' or 'the class can't use that school anyway so there goes that spell!' and 'Is this spell really all that powerful now that only a single class can use it? and even then, they must take this first, and they won't be able to do this because they don't have that school."

It's rather in reverse, but doing the hard work now of nailing down what makes a class a class and THEN refining their existing spell list by the chopping block of schools already done would be easier in the long run.




Secondly I would revise how spells are cast. For example a review of the concentration skill, and is spellcasting hampered by being prone. Interaction of armor and that sort of thing.

Once you have that down, I would edit/add spells as needed to schools that match my criteria. For example if you want your games such that cliffs and ravines pose a problem, I would make the fly spell to be duration: concentration up to 1min/level. Another good thing would be to give a serious review of metamagic reducers, and the ability to influence magical effects already in place.

Satisfied with that I would assign schools to classes, and modify classes as needed.

Well I'd rather work with what I have then invent new things. Tome of Battle introduced Strike, Boosts, Counters and Stances as a means of limiting a maneuver's power. I feel the same can be done for spells. I don't want to change the rules per say, but rather, adopt rules already in place elsewhere to here so it isn't such a huge departure and can be more acceptable to a wider audience of people to understand and play with.

Tome of battle supposedly 'fixed melee' and brought it up higher on the tiers. I haven't heard much brokenness from maneuvers as I have for spells. So... to draw back spells to the power level that Maneuvers established seemed reasonable. You are only doing what has already been done counteractivly retospectivly eksettera excetera ectera. Simply separating the schools will be a huge power 'nerf' because no one class will have access to all of the schools as ToB (aside from Master of Nine which is a prc) and while I am not yet certain of how this will affect classes that mix the classes through Prcs like master of nine does... Well... I'll get to that is this works for core. Because if it fails for core, then no need to worry about the splat books! heh!



I see what you did that. Old School like a Pro :smallbiggrin:

Mmmmm tasty. Why haven't you commented on my Dirty Handbook Fixes at BG? this is what you long for :smallsmile:

Manditory plug: Yes I and the other min/maxers have already fixed most everything really broken in 3.5 (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=3288.0)

I'm always looked for ways to nerf casters. Restricting schools sounds so arbitrary it could be fun. The more things are restricted, the better when it comes to naughty casters trying to break your campaign.


I try. And thank you for posting that resource it will come in handy for when I get down to the nitty of the gritty for spells and loose my witty.

Also, arbitrary as it may be no one would make that comment on ToB since it was designed that way in the first place. If Core had been designed to separate the schools in the first place it wouldn't be a nerf, and honestly it might not be as badly broken as it is. A mistake? perhaps. People can play all they like and NOT break things as long as they are trusted not to abuse things. Whereas. Those that can't be trusted, well, .... you just can't trust em. Also, It seems to me everyone is speaking as if such a thing has never been though of before or done before... I tried it with a little homebrew class of mine which didn't go anywhere, so it's nothing new to me. And I don't have much vested in casters to be biased to what I am loosing and the power cut I will be making in myself. So, while a lot of people are saying it has never been done before and giving reasons why it shouldn't and spells should be fixed alone... well... as you has proven, others have already done this. So if I'm going to do something crazy like try to balance all the spells in core. I think I'm allowed do crazily things that nobody has done before, if indeed they haven't...

I will undoubtedly stand upon your shoulders for the work you and fellow Giants have done to balance a lot of what is broken. But I shall take a small step and a Giant leap to tackle the schools and access to them as Tome of Battle already has and through that do something unremarkable. Really. It's not such a big leap. ToB is my reference and everyone seems to know how that works. I'm not breaking new ground here, just trying to break up the schools as was done elsewhere and in my opinion, should have been done in core. *shrug*



The eight schools of arcane magic are abjuration, conjuration, divination, enchantment, evocation, illusion, necromancy, transmutation and universal. There are 15 base classes that cast full arcane or divine spells, but many are niche-based. Also keep in mind that schools are very unequal between arcane and divine. An arcane healer wouldn't be so hot.


archivist: illusion
*beguiler: enchantment
*cleric: abjuration and universal
dread necromancer: necromancy
*druid: conjuration except (healing)
*favored souls: enchantment
*healer: both arcane and divine conjuration (healing)
*mystics: divination and necromancy
*shaman: transmutation
shugenja: divination
*spirit shaman: illusion
sorcerer: conjuration except (healing)
warmage: evocation
wizard: abjuration and universal
wu-jen: transmutation

The above is an approximation. Some things would have to be adjusted like domain spells just being ordinary spell slots, etc. UMD would need trickle-down nerfing.

The half-casters: [6]bard w/o sublime chord, [5]duskblade, hexblade, paladin (all but one variants have small lists), ranger ([5]the variant has a small list), and spell-thief (NPC [5]adepts seem optional) should be allowed more but I'm not going to take the time with them. Its still nearly balanced before the full casters get 8th or 9th level spells if there are no fast casters.

Any Prestige classes that have their own casting either give their relation to the above base class casting (just mix and match the aspects, eg. beholder mages would have both wizard and sorc options) or have their own small lists.

Comments on the curb-stomp nerf?

Well as I am only trying for core myself (because I generally have a better understanding of core and who is supposed to be what as opposed to all the splat books and classes) my comments won't hold TOO much weight... however...

*archivist: illusion Can't say much about this class, however from skiming the base description I would add Abjuration to the list at least for the fact they protect themselves with divine magic as well to safeguard from the taint and so forth. For one who archives divine tomes and arcane texts a knowledge of using such powers in a way that shields and protects them seems fine.

*beguiler: enchantment No arguments here, but I would add Illusion as well because they are very tricky, fooling others as a bard would do.

*cleric: abjuration and universal No Conjuration [healing]?

dread necromancer: necromancy Naturally, but would they protect themselves through abjuration as well? Having a defense agiants spirits/lawful creatures/good etc would also work.

*druid: conjuration except (healing) As the only other source of divine healing in core, I don't see it as a stretch to allow them to heal. Clerics shouldn't corner the market in any case, since a Druid and a Cleric use Divine power simply from different sources.

*favored souls: enchantment I don't know if I'd agree with this... I would give them Conjuration [healing] and Abjuration for the party, like a cleric only flavored so he is more battle capable, which I believe was the intent.

*healer: both arcane and divine conjuration (healing) Sounds good.

*mystics: divination and necromancy hmm I'd give them a choice between Necromancy and Conjuration [healing] just in case.

*shaman: transmutation Add in abjuration for the soul thematics inherent.

shugenja: divination I'd give them evocation as well.

*spirit shaman: illusion More Conjuration [healing]!

sorcerer: conjuration except (healing) And at the least Evocation, though I don't see why they can't have enchantment as well.

warmage: evocation Naturally.

wizard: abjuration and universal ouch.

wu-jen: transmutation I'd give them Evocation and enchantment, like an Eastern Sorcerer.

That's all I got off the top of my head, but I'd love to hear your reasoning for the selection you made! And also thanks for your help!

cheezewizz2000
2010-04-22, 01:31 AM
I make a point of mentioning, in other posts, how invocations seemed to be an attempt at balance and how psionics is considered pretty balanced due to power points and their availability being a limiting factor. However I've always had a distaste for point pool systems in the manner of reducing immersion and though I don't hate them, I think as Tome of Battle has shown us, there are ways of getting around to balance without points/power point pools. However I WILL look into his work, simply because if points are a limiting factor there may be a correlation in valuing spells via point cost that could aid me in my work. So thank you, I could definitely use it... if I can get around to it without drowning first. heh.



In defense of the sorcerous talent points, it's not a point based casting system a-la psionics. It's a point based progression system. Spend points to increase casting power in a school, more powerful (versatile) schools cost more points to increase. You trade access to a wide range of spells for increased save DCs, CL and eventual 20+CL SR vs spells of your specialist school. YMMV, but I think it's a nice system. It does, however, nerf sorcs that want to be counter-spelling specialists, but those guys could get away with focusing on abjuration.

Paulus
2010-04-22, 04:15 AM
In defense of the sorcerous talent points, it's not a point based casting system a-la psionics. It's a point based progression system. Spend points to increase casting power in a school, more powerful (versatile) schools cost more points to increase. You trade access to a wide range of spells for increased save DCs, CL and eventual 20+CL SR vs spells of your specialist school. YMMV, but I think it's a nice system. It does, however, nerf sorcs that want to be counter-spelling specialists, but those guys could get away with focusing on abjuration.

Yeah I noted this two seconds after I actually looked at it. My apologies for the quick generalization. It isn't, as you said, what I'm looking for but still offers, as I said, another view of the standard of valuing I need for my research to split the schools, Spells, and add prerequisites like in Tome of Battle. So thank you for your assistance in any case!!

...


Thus far a lot of the feedback has been to do what I am doing now, last, but not much on my reasoning as to why I split the schools and if it works in their opinion. I would really like the opinions of people who really know the classes well to weigh in on what they should and shouldn't have, thematically, and what to avoid schoolwise for the big power combos. I know what I have already mentioned in my reasoning, but would like to hear other RP perspectives on it in case someone can make me see another side that would change my mind as to splitting the schools more definitely. Polling has resulted wildly in people who say the schools shouldn't be split at all to people who say i haven't split schools enough. They really feel like allowing such a limited access would be better but haven't fully explained their own reasoning.

I would like to know why they feel the way they do about splitting the schools, of even if they agree or disagree with my 'ideals' of the classes as one posted has said he did with Necromancers without sheep. Heh. I need more of this and thank everyone for contributing it. If this continues I will have a strong goal fro which to aim fueled by concept of the classes which will make it easier t say "well they don't need this spell balanced for them" or "They don't even need this spell at all, but THIS class could use it, so Ill balanced it with them in mind and their school selection". That will be the real brass tax so to speak, and a lot of it will be in silent consideration.

As a matter of fact I've already begun separating core Abjuration into Arcane, Divine, and Bard. Simply to get a better handle on the massive task of balancing the school and it's spells. Divine Abjuration will vary for Clerics and Druids of course as will Arcane for Sorcerers and Wizards. Bards will get even smaller selections of abjuration spells simply because Illusion will protect them so well. This is what I'm doing for core at least, for right now. Paladin's and Rangers are almost an afterthought, merely because If you iron out the heavy hitters first, the others who don't rely on it are a bit easier to tackle.

Still, please weigh in everybody. I'd love to hear your opinions and whys and such!

Roc Ness
2010-04-22, 04:47 AM
Thus far a lot of the feedback has been to do what I am doing now, last, but not much on my reasoning as to why I split the schools and if it works in their opinion. I would really like the opinions of people who really know the classes well to weigh in on what they should and shouldn't have, thematically, and what to avoid schoolwise for the big power combos. I know what I have already mentioned in my reasoning, but would like to hear other RP perspectives on it in case someone can make me see another side that would change my mind as to splitting the schools more definitely. Polling has resulted wildly in people who say the schools shouldn't be split at all to people who say i haven't split schools enough. They really feel like allowing such a limited access would be better but haven't fully explained their own reasoning.

I don't know all the classes all too well, but while I agree that schools need to be split, I believe that your current splitting is either enough or a little too much. My reasoning is that part of the fun of DnD is your freedom of choice. You could play this with a little bit of that without needing to get too mechanical. Everybody hates railroading, and actually having the rules severely railroad your character ability choices is quite annoying.

Still, if you are going to split the schools even further than they are already split now, may I please suggest you also give each class an "Advanced Learning" ability akin to the Warmage and Beguiler abilities of the same name, but with an additional (but limited wherever appropriate) ability to choose spells from schools otherwise unaccessible. :smallsmile:


I would like to know why they feel the way they do about splitting the schools, of even if they agree or disagree with my 'ideals' of the classes as one posted has said he did with Necromancers without sheep. Heh. I need more of this and thank everyone for contributing it. If this continues I will have a strong goal fro which to aim fueled by concept of the classes which will make it easier t say "well they don't need this spell balanced for them" or "They don't even need this spell at all, but THIS class could use it, so Ill balanced it with them in mind and their school selection". That will be the real brass tax so to speak, and a lot of it will be in silent consideration.

That would be quite complex, as everybody would have different views about what spells are appropriate for each class (Hence my advanced learning suggestion above). For example: Transmutations are barred from sorcerers for you. However, I personally don't feel why sorcerers shouldn't have the ability to change things. I just feel that sorcerers aren't complete without the ability to turn that sword you're holding into a viper, or the general abilities to enchant weapons, make people bigger/smaller/faster/slower. I would say: Sorcerers should be able to Haste, but what sort of Druid (who can cast transmutations) would Haste? (Although I suppose your Arcane/Divine splits may cover the druid bit.)

For me, it is just something sorcerers do, like how pretty much everyone can feel confortable with a sorcerer who enjoys screeching "BURN, BURN!" and blasting everything. Sure, there are a few specific barred spells that you could just say sorcerers have because everybody agrees sorcerers should have them. Fly for example, is a typical sorcerous spell that everybody would probably agree they should have, and there is probably an evocation out there people commonly expect sorcerers not to use. Whereas if we raised the question of a spell such as Telekinesis, you'll find a whole lotta people shouting why/why not Telekinesis is a sorcerous spell, wherein lies the problem. :smallannoyed:


As a matter of fact I've already begun separating core Abjuration into Arcane, Divine, and Bard. Simply to get a better handle on the massive task of balancing the school and it's spells. Divine Abjuration will vary for Clerics and Druids of course as will Arcane for Sorcerers and Wizards. Bards will get even smaller selections of abjuration spells simply because Illusion will protect them so well. This is what I'm doing for core at least, for right now. Paladin's and Rangers are almost an afterthought, merely because If you iron out the heavy hitters first, the others who don't rely on it are a bit easier to tackle.

Good for you. :smallbiggrin:

Emmerask
2010-04-22, 07:49 AM
I'd gladly take you up on your offer once it is done, if it even gets done, but don't wait up for me. heh. Thanks again!


:smallsmile:
Started Yesterday and got a decent chunk of work done.
I always wanted a Spellbook application anyway and putting in optional prereqs for spells is easy enough.
Sadly my time is very limited with work and studying so it may take some time until it is finished.
In the end I hope it will be very similar to the neverwinter nights (pc game) spellbook.
Anyway if there is enough demand I could port it to android phones (sadly no iPhone possible don´t own a mac and the none mac iPhone coding options are pretty bad limited ^^).
Getting a bit ahead of myself :smallwink:, will create a thread when there is something presentable (hopefully next month or so):smallsmile:

Morithias
2010-04-22, 02:06 PM
what I really love is that almost everyone uses the wizard as a huge example of power, but rarely ever quotes the archivest.

Personally I find the archivest more powerful, because they can get domain spells if they can find a scroll, and almost all the wizard's spells can be found in some domain, even wish and time stop.

Throw in the Shen as a divine sorcerer, and so on. He can get almost every spell in existence.

Then you shift him into the Sacred Exorcist class for Turning, and you can now use DMM on wizard, druid, and paladin spells.

Then there's dark knowledge, and the fact they can use armor.

It's just a brutal class, but compared to the wizard it's almost completely ignored.

I hope your attempts to balance the spells works! :D

Divide by Zero
2010-04-22, 02:13 PM
what I really love is that almost everyone uses the wizard as a huge example of power, but rarely ever quotes the archivest.

I see archivist quoted frequently, actually. The Big Five, as I understand it, are (in alphabetical order) archivist, artificer, cleric, druid, wizard. Sometimes StP erudite gets thrown in as well.


Personally I find the archivest more powerful, because they can get domain spells if they can find a scroll, and almost all the wizard's spells can be found in some domain, even wish and time stop.

Emphasis mine. Any high-tier class can be powerful if the DM gives them exactly what they need.


Throw in the Shen as a divine sorcerer, and so on. He can get almost every spell in existence.

Not familiar with that one, but see previous point.


Then you shift him into the Sacred Exorcist class for Turning, and you can now use DMM on wizard, druid, and paladin spells.

And the wizard goes into Incantatrix and persists all his spells. If we're using cheese, give it to both sides.


Then there's dark knowledge, and the fact they can use armor.

Dark Knowledge is nice, I'll admit. Armor isn't as big a deal, and can be replicated by spells and/or magic items anyway.


It's just a brutal class, but compared to the wizard it's almost completely ignored.

See first response.

Koury
2010-04-22, 02:19 PM
Any high-tier class can be powerful if the DM gives them exactly what they need.

The only thing a DM has to do with aquiring something is answering the question "Does it exist."

If the answer is yes, the class can get it themselves.

Morithias
2010-04-22, 02:25 PM
Take a single level in artifier. You lose one caster level, but now can make the scroll with a UMD check. If a spell is divine anywhere now, you can have it without it being given to you.

Also I admited that it is a brutal class. I was more just surprised how compared to the wizard and cleric, it's almost never mentioned.

erikun
2010-04-22, 03:09 PM
The archivist is just a wizard with a larger spell pool, honestly. The reason it's rarely mentioned is that it's not located in core, and most of the discussion about D&D begins with core material.

--

Back on topic, I'm afraid I'm not seeing the point of such haphazard divisions in the schools of magic. I mean, yes, it makes it easier to work with each seperate class, but the justification for the division seems poorly defined. You would be better starting with a solid idea of what each class should have. (Witches use enchantments, transformations, and curses!) You will never be able to answer your own question of "is this balanced for the Wizard?" if you never had a clear idea of what the Wizard was supposed to be in the first place.

The first major issue I see in your revision is that you aren't really limiting the Wizard in any meaningful way. Conjuration and Transformation are powerful, but choosing between the two is simply a matter of "win via method 1" or "win via method 2." There isn't much difference between using Gate to summon a Solar for free wishes or using Polymorph to become a Solar for free wishes. If you do get around to nerfing one or the other, you just create an imbalance between the schools, thus making it no longer a fair choice.

Secondly, you're cutting out a fair number of otherwise viable character concepts. What if you wanted to play an earth-elementalist spellcaster who could call on earth elementals (conjuration) and shape stone with his hands (transmutation)? What if you wanted to play an aether-mage who talked with spirits (Necromancy) and shaped the aether in the form of attacks (force, Evocation)? I realize that the level based system in D&D makes some character concepts difficult or impossible by default, but all this seems to do is add an additional layer of complication.

Third,

If you cut certain schools from the use of other classes Such as Evocation from Clerics, BAM, suddenly you have no more Codzilla because Divine power is GONE.
This is kind of a problem I have with your viewpoint. I realize that nobody is going to know every problem spell from every supplement - or if you did, fixing them directly would be a much simplier matter. However, saying something like "Remove Divine Power and CoDZilla is no longer a problem" seems to indicate a misunderstanding of the problem. My DMM Cleric with Greater Magic Weapon, Magic Vestment, Protection from Evil, Righteous Might, and Enlarge Person isn't going to miss the 3-4 points of BAB. I highly doubt anyone else in the party under the similar effects will, either.

Plus, banning Evocation bans spells like Searing Light and Fire Storm. These spells are already pretty weak (compared to other options availalbe) and fit really well with a divine agent calling down their deity's wrath from the heavens. Do we really need to be removing such spells from the Cleric's list? This isn't the problem, but such a weed-whacker approach to cutting spells ultimately kills quite a bit of the flavor that was found in these classes.

--

I'm going to give a short example of what I would do if I was faced with this project - trying to restrict spellcasters by restricting their spells. Spoiler'd for size.


First, I'd start off with a clearly defined class. I'll begin with the Illusionist. It's a classic example after all, and in D&D it has some very clearly defined flavor: creating false sensory impressions, and creating semi-solid objects from shadow-stuff.

Next, let's take a look at the spell list to see what doesn't fit the theme. Color Spray + the various Patterns honestly feel more like an Enchantment effect, so we'll move them there for now. Dream/Nightmare honestly feels more like a scrying or divination effect. Simulacrum doesn't seem to fit our theme at all, and should go. Shadow Conjuration/Evocation will work, although we'd probably want to limit them to summoned creatures/objects and throwing around energy, respectively. A Shadow Miracle doesn't make any sense.

Now, what to add? Read/Detect Magic is a good choice, as is Permanency. People will throw a fit if they can't make their illusionary hat permanent. :smalltongue: On the other hand, I don't see why an Illusionist would have Wish. Since we're working with spells that affect the senses, Light would be appropriate, as would Silence. Clairaudience/Clairvoyance might be a strange one, but fits in with the "messing with senses" theme. Finally, I'd add Evard's Black Tentacles as a "grasping shadows" type of spell, as that seems to be the way the spell is described anyways.

Finally: class features. One of the problems with the Wizard is that they have no class features; there is no reason to avoid prestige classing out, and it is difficult to create a class to compete with the Wizard when it's all about the spells. So, ideas on how to make the Illusionist unique and more... illusiony. One thought is to allow concentration on multiple spells at once, spending a Swift, Move, or Standard action to maintain concentration. This would allow the Illusionist to maintain a spell and act, either within combat or as part of a bluff. Another popular theme is personalized illusions, or illusions that affect only one person but are invisible to those around them.

To wrap things up, let's give him d6 hit die, the rogue's BAB and a slightly expanded skill list to cover things like Bluff and Move Silently. It allows him to participate in combat (since the spells rarely do damage) and act as a sneak/face, without stealing those roles completely from the rogue or bard.

Ultimately, how did we fare? Well, taking a look back at the Wizard, we got rid of the problematic Simulacrum spell. We changed Shadow Conjuration and Shadow Evocation enough to prevent the worst of the Shadowcaster abuse. We swiped a useful spell or two from Conjuration, making that school a bit weaker, and added a few spells to Enchantment, possibly making that one stronger. The Wizard still can't concentrate on two spells at once or apply illusion spells directly to one target, so no Invisibility + personalized Silence for them. Honestly, I think both the Wizard and the new Illusionist are better after such a process, certainly more than trying to cut out various schools and turning the Cleric into an Abjurer/Necromancer.

Paulus
2010-04-22, 08:27 PM
I don't know all the classes all too well, but while I agree that schools need to be split, I believe that your current splitting is either enough or a little too much. My reasoning is that part of the fun of DnD is your freedom of choice. You could play this with a little bit of that without needing to get too mechanical. Everybody hates railroading, and actually having the rules severely railroad your character ability choices is quite annoying.

Still, if you are going to split the schools even further than they are already split now, may I please suggest you also give each class an "Advanced Learning" ability akin to the Warmage and Beguiler abilities of the same name, but with an additional (but limited wherever appropriate) ability to choose spells from schools otherwise unaccessible. :smallsmile:

I understanding limiting a character can be very annoying, and I can also see why people would want more choices. After all, that is what makes them more powerful and who doesn't want more power? But there is also a case of "you simply can not do that" because again you over power every other character. "You can not be a vampire who walks in the sun doesn't have to drink blood and suffers no LA and is immune to everything but silver" because it is simply too powerful. The game has rules for a reason and rules will always limit people's choices because that is in part what makes a game fun. Win by following the rules and you area actually playing the game, where as if you don't follow any of the rules you aren't really playing.

Wizards and other such classes have add access to everything all they want since the beginning, and my changes will certainly not usurp the original because people can simply choose to ignore it. However if my changes actually help balance through stricter rules, then someone could have fun playing the game in this way. As for allowing people a skill to choose a spell form another school, I see no problem with this, after all. It's in Tome of Battle. Just make it a feat that will give you a spell Arcane or Divine, but the prerequisites so you can just pick any spell you want from any list. Again this is to limit power. If I don't limit enough it will just be an annoyance, if I limit to much it can destroy any desire to play under such harsh rules, but finding the balance is hard when you are trying to define and idea with your own idea. "What are D&D Wizards?" to me, to you? such things are part of why I'm asking other people their opinions with splitting schools as a focus for discussion.


That would be quite complex, as everybody would have different views about what spells are appropriate for each class (Hence my advanced learning suggestion above). For example: Transmutations are barred from sorcerers for you. However, I personally don't feel why sorcerers shouldn't have the ability to change things. I just feel that sorcerers aren't complete without the ability to turn that sword you're holding into a viper, or the general abilities to enchant weapons, make people bigger/smaller/faster/slower. I would say: Sorcerers should be able to Haste, but what sort of Druid (who can cast transmutations) would Haste? (Although I suppose your Arcane/Divine splits may cover the druid bit.)

For me, it is just something sorcerers do, like how pretty much everyone can feel confortable with a sorcerer who enjoys screeching "BURN, BURN!" and blasting everything. Sure, there are a few specific barred spells that you could just say sorcerers have because everybody agrees sorcerers should have them. Fly for example, is a typical sorcerous spell that everybody would probably agree they should have, and there is probably an evocation out there people commonly expect sorcerers not to use. Whereas if we raised the question of a spell such as Telekinesis, you'll find a whole lotta people shouting why/why not Telekinesis is a sorcerous spell, wherein lies the problem. :smallannoyed:


Indeed this is partly where the problem of separating pre-established ideas come into play. Since you can already be anything you want with the current classes, narrowing down the best example and idea for such classes so that they are stronger individually from each other is troublesome. Look at it this way, you think a sorcerer should be able to transmute things. Is this because your sorcerer has always been able to do so, or because when you think of sorcerers you think of transmuters? Ask yourself this then. If someone thought barbarian's shouldn't rage but instead have amazing skills with weaponry and nature like the ranger because of the noble savage idea, you could argue that Barbarians are more likely candidates for berserk fury and deserve rage. But someone would still want to play a noble savage barbarian who acted and played more like a ranger but wanted to be called a barbarian.

the same can be done with a wizard who transmutes, who simply prefers to be called a sorcerer. But for the general world, sorcerers have been know to do more evocation then wizards simply because that is how they have been played so long, so that would factor in to my splitting. Just as a barbarian has raged so long and a ranger has tracked and two weapon fought so long should factor in a decision on who gets rage and track. Simplistic I know and made even more complex by the fact people have preconceived notions based on how they've already played.

But then again this is all homebrew anyway and I'm not forcing anybody to follow any of it. :smallsmile:


Back on topic, I'm afraid I'm not seeing the point of such haphazard divisions in the schools of magic. I mean, yes, it makes it easier to work with each seperate class, but the justification for the division seems poorly defined. You would be better starting with a solid idea of what each class should have. (Witches use enchantments, transformations, and curses!) You will never be able to answer your own question of "is this balanced for the Wizard?" if you never had a clear idea of what the Wizard was supposed to be in the first place.

That's why I'm polling the community to define these very things. I have my own ideas and expressed above, trying to strengthen the definitions of the core PHB that have already been laid down without allowing the classes access to every/as many schools as they already have. Haphazard as it may be, I never said I would do it elegantly, or even well, but I did say I would try. So this is merely an attempt, and the best I can do.


The first major issue I see in your revision is that you aren't really limiting the Wizard in any meaningful way. Conjuration and Transformation are powerful, but choosing between the two is simply a matter of "win via method 1" or "win via method 2." There isn't much difference between using Gate to summon a Solar for free wishes or using Polymorph to become a Solar for free wishes. If you do get around to nerfing one or the other, you just create an imbalance between the schools, thus making it no longer a fair choice.

Yet forcing people to choose either winning from method 1 or 2 is better then letting them have both ways of winning on one character "just in case" win one didn't work for some reason they can always use win two. And when I do get around to messing with the school itself against each other once I know clearly for whom the schools will go to, the choice shouldn't be fairly balanced against each other. Some schools will naturally be more powerful then others or at least have more powerful spells then others, this isn't a matter of fairness but of how things turned out to be.

If you really want fair, everybody would be able to do everything everyone else could do. That is fair. But if you want diversity you will have to make some better at some things then others, such as a wizard being better with spells then a warblade, yet a warblade better then a wizard with melee. You see? A transmuter will be good with melee due to what form he takes. A summoner for what he summons. But a summoner who can not summon will still have a back up in evocation or necromancy (if I don't split the two and two against each other) and can always protect themselves with adjuration.

Both will remain powerful, because the things they can become and the things they can summon are powerful. But at least in this way they can't become something powerful and call something powerful at the same time. Making it fairer between the two, but no where near fair to a fighter that can do neither of these things, or a cleric who can't, and so on. The next step then is to make the power of those things which make them uniquely powerful less powerful if to value that power against other powerful things.


Secondly, you're cutting out a fair number of otherwise viable character concepts. What if you wanted to play an earth-elementalist spellcaster who could call on earth elementals (conjuration) and shape stone with his hands (transmutation)? What if you wanted to play an aether-mage who talked with spirits (Necromancy) and shaped the aether in the form of attacks (force, Evocation)? I realize that the level based system in D&D makes some character concepts difficult or impossible by default, but all this seems to do is add an additional layer of complication.


The I could suggest to them they become a earth elementist that can become an earth elemental (transmutation) and still be able to shape stone with his hands (transmutation). Just re-flavor it as you like. Or an aether-mage who talks with spirits(necromancy) and shaped the aether in the form of attacks that harm in the form of energy (enervation, Necromancy) Or as it stands now you could become a necromancer evoker to fit that role but you couldn't transmute or summon. It may not be the perfect class for what you want, but that is why so many other Prc's were made, or a DM can homebrew with a player, or reflavor whatever they want. Core makes it easier yes, because it gives you all those options. In which case stick with core if you really don't want to use my changes. I don't grudge anybody for it. :smallsmile:




Third,

This is kind of a problem I have with your viewpoint. I realize that nobody is going to know every problem spell from every supplement - or if you did, fixing them directly would be a much simplier matter. However, saying something like "Remove Divine Power and CoDZilla is no longer a problem" seems to indicate a misunderstanding of the problem. My DMM Cleric with Greater Magic Weapon, Magic Vestment, Protection from Evil, Righteous Might, and Enlarge Person isn't going to miss the 3-4 points of BAB. I highly doubt anyone else in the party under the similar effects will, either.


More a misunderstanding of the total problem. Divine power may not solve it, but it certainly lessens some of it's power. I've said repeatedly I would miss quite a lot, and that I in fact didn't understand a great deal about spells. Which is why I am glad people like you are kind enough to educate me, this is exactly the research I have been doing to find out what is so broken and how to fix it. But again, remember this is only the beginning, Phase zero. I know there is a lot more to be done and learned. This project may even be so large, even for just core, that it may not be completed for several months. I still intend to try the best I can. I am after all only one person working with several years worth of research and established work.


Plus, banning Evocation bans spells like Searing Light and Fire Storm. These spells are already pretty weak (compared to other options availalbe) and fit really well with a divine agent calling down their deity's wrath from the heavens. Do we really need to be removing such spells from the Cleric's list? This isn't the problem, but such a weed-whacker approach to cutting spells ultimately kills quite a bit of the flavor that was found in these classes.

Flavor which as you said was pretty weak compared to the other options, I addressed this in the cleric part actually, saying how if a cleric could do all of this, why would they still need even MORE abilities such as calling down the deities wrath? They are certainly flavorful additions, but I don't feel one class needs to have ALL of the flavor. So I ask you, do we really need to keep these spells on the Cleric's list? They can already heal, do some combat, and protect their party. Why should clerics have even more power to vent the god's fury? shouldn't that be more in the hands of Paladins, or Favored souls? Putting it all into one class makes that cleric too powerful, proved because the cleric already is. So, of course having so much flavorful power and cutting down on the power will cut down on the flavor. However, too much flavor and you can't taste anything.



I'm going to give a short example of what I would do if I was faced with this project - trying to restrict spellcasters by restricting their spells. Spoiler'd for size.


First, I'd start off with a clearly defined class. I'll begin with the Illusionist. It's a classic example after all, and in D&D it has some very clearly defined flavor: creating false sensory impressions, and creating semi-solid objects from shadow-stuff.

Next, let's take a look at the spell list to see what doesn't fit the theme. Color Spray + the various Patterns honestly feel more like an Enchantment effect, so we'll move them there for now. Dream/Nightmare honestly feels more like a scrying or divination effect. Simulacrum doesn't seem to fit our theme at all, and should go. Shadow Conjuration/Evocation will work, although we'd probably want to limit them to summoned creatures/objects and throwing around energy, respectively. A Shadow Miracle doesn't make any sense.

Now, what to add? Read/Detect Magic is a good choice, as is Permanency. People will throw a fit if they can't make their illusionary hat permanent. :smalltongue: On the other hand, I don't see why an Illusionist would have Wish. Since we're working with spells that affect the senses, Light would be appropriate, as would Silence. Clairaudience/Clairvoyance might be a strange one, but fits in with the "messing with senses" theme. Finally, I'd add Evard's Black Tentacles as a "grasping shadows" type of spell, as that seems to be the way the spell is described anyways.

Finally: class features. One of the problems with the Wizard is that they have no class features; there is no reason to avoid prestige classing out, and it is difficult to create a class to compete with the Wizard when it's all about the spells. So, ideas on how to make the Illusionist unique and more... illusiony. One thought is to allow concentration on multiple spells at once, spending a Swift, Move, or Standard action to maintain concentration. This would allow the Illusionist to maintain a spell and act, either within combat or as part of a bluff. Another popular theme is personalized illusions, or illusions that affect only one person but are invisible to those around them.

To wrap things up, let's give him d6 hit die, the rogue's BAB and a slightly expanded skill list to cover things like Bluff and Move Silently. It allows him to participate in combat (since the spells rarely do damage) and act as a sneak/face, without stealing those roles completely from the rogue or bard.

Ultimately, how did we fare? Well, taking a look back at the Wizard, we got rid of the problematic Simulacrum spell. We changed Shadow Conjuration and Shadow Evocation enough to prevent the worst of the Shadowcaster abuse. We swiped a useful spell or two from Conjuration, making that school a bit weaker, and added a few spells to Enchantment, possibly making that one stronger. The Wizard still can't concentrate on two spells at once or apply illusion spells directly to one target, so no Invisibility + personalized Silence for them. Honestly, I think both the Wizard and the new Illusionist are better after such a process, certainly more than trying to cut out various schools and turning the Cleric into an Abjurer/Necromancer.


The problem with this is that you have now perhaps balanced a single class. But why would anybody play an illusionist if they can just play a wizard who can do everything the illusionist can and more? No one ever said if you want to play a wizard you have to be an illusionist, and no one ever said if you wanted to do illusions you had to be an illusionist, nor that a wizard couldn't do everything an illusionist could. There is no reason to be an illusionist when something just like an illusionist and better is right there.

Unless you mean to say that only Illusionist can use the illusion school, or that only a wizard who is an illusionist can use illusions. The Illusion school itself may be balanced, but when it's not defined who can use it, anybody can, and this lessens the power of the illusionist because people can still cherry pick the best from it and call themselves an illusionist without having to follow your balance. And all that balance is for nothing.

Or are you saying only a wizard can use the Illusion school and thereby be an illusionist? What if someone thinks an illusionist should be able to enchant people by "messing with their senses"? In any case they could simply take Enchantment, or Conjuration and Evocation and not need to abuse Shadow conjuration or shadow evocation because they can flat out use the real thing. Less practical and as easy as using one school, but doable since they have access to all schools, balanced or not, they can still find the best powerful combination from a collection of all schools and use them at will. And if they get tired of doing Illusions nothing prevents them from conjuring up a big bad, becoming a big bad, and still doing illusions because they are an illusionist. All perfectly legal, even in the class fix you posted.

In any sense, I'm not trying to make a new class, I'm trying to define and adapt a system already present to classes that utilize them via comparison to preexisting works such as tome of battle. This isn't the creation of completely new classes, it's trying to fix spell casting itself. I'm doing the hard part of finding out which schools are most synonymous with classes so that i can factor it into my decision making when I actually do try to balance the schools as you have done with the illusionist. Harder? perhaps. But It makes sense to me, and I guess you could just call me crazy. Afterall I'm crazy to attempt this. But still. Hey, thanks for giving me suggestions on balancing illusion as a school itself. I'll keep it in mind for reference when it actually comes down to strengthening or tweaking the schools to better fit the classes who utilize them.

After all, a Wizard is the sum of his spells. So what spells would best sum a wizard? all of them is too much, and cherry picking is still to much, you would only pick the best from each school- even if you changed the best so they weren't so good- even a huge number of balanced spells is imbalanced. Therefore to limit schools themselves seems the logical. That way they can't have all the spells (balanced or not) they want at all times. Still thank you for your help and your reply I was much educated and it will help me greatly in the time to come because even a weed-whacker approach still gets rid of the weeds. :smallwink:

Roc Ness
2010-04-22, 08:52 PM
I understanding limiting a character can be very annoying, and I can also see why people would want more choices. After all, that is what makes them more powerful and who doesn't want more power? But there is also a case of "you simply can not do that" because again you over power every other character. "You can not be a vampire who walks in the sun doesn't have to drink blood and suffers no LA and is immune to everything but silver" because it is simply too powerful. The game has rules for a reason and rules will always limit people's choices because that is in part what makes a game fun. Win by following the rules and you area actually playing the game, where as if you don't follow any of the rules you aren't really playing.

Wizards and other such classes have add access to everything all they want since the beginning, and my changes will certainly not usurp the original because people can simply choose to ignore it. However if my changes actually help balance through stricter rules, then someone could have fun playing the game in this way. As for allowing people a skill to choose a spell form another school, I see no problem with this, after all. It's in Tome of Battle. Just make it a feat that will give you a spell Arcane or Divine, but the prerequisites so you can just pick any spell you want from any list. Again this is to limit power. If I don't limit enough it will just be an annoyance, if I limit to much it can destroy any desire to play under such harsh rules, but finding the balance is hard when you are trying to define and idea with your own idea. "What are D&D Wizards?" to me, to you? such things are part of why I'm asking other people their opinions with splitting schools as a focus for discussion.

Indeed this is partly where the problem of separating pre-established ideas come into play. Since you can already be anything you want with the current classes, narrowing down the best example and idea for such classes so that they are stronger individually from each other is troublesome. Look at it this way, you think a sorcerer should be able to transmute things. Is this because your sorcerer has always been able to do so, or because when you think of sorcerers you think of transmuters? Ask yourself this then. If someone thought barbarian's shouldn't rage but instead have amazing skills with weaponry and nature like the ranger because of the noble savage idea, you could argue that Barbarians are more likely candidates for berserk fury and deserve rage. But someone would still want to play a noble savage barbarian who acted and played more like a ranger but wanted to be called a barbarian.

the same can be done with a wizard who transmutes, who simply prefers to be called a sorcerer. But for the general world, sorcerers have been know to do more evocation then wizards simply because that is how they have been played so long, so that would factor in to my splitting. Just as a barbarian has raged so long and a ranger has tracked and two weapon fought so long should factor in a decision on who gets rage and track. Simplistic I know and made even more complex by the fact people have preconceived notions based on how they've already played.

But then again this is all homebrew anyway and I'm not forcing anybody to follow any of it. :smallsmile:

Okay, you make convincing points. :smallsmile: Although I must point out that the desire for choice is not necessarily the desire of power, even if power may inadvertently creep from it. I'm not going to go into the vampire part of the power=choice argument, because whoever chooses to play that has probably forgotten that there are other people around who want to play a nice game without some guy breaking the rules to sate his/her overdeveloped fascination with vampires trumping all. :smalltongue:

Paulus
2010-04-22, 09:03 PM
Okay, you make convincing points. :smallsmile: Although I must point out that the desire for choice is not necessarily the desire of power, even if power may inadvertently creep from it. I'm not going to go into the vampire part of the power=choice argument, because whoever chooses to play that has probably forgotten that there are other people around who want to play a nice game without some guy breaking the rules to sate his/her overdeveloped fascination with vampires trumping all. :smalltongue:

Thanks. I just know that when I get to part of balancing the schools themselves and I start the thread with:

Enchantment
Who has access: Bard, Sorcerer

I don't want the thread cluttered with "hey how come only bards or sorcerers have access? why can't a wizard? he is an Enchanter type!" Well I'll get those anyway, but then I can link to this thread from days ago when they could have had their say and didn't when I began all of this.

Also the sample was just on a general basis, it doesn't really anything to do with vampires, but rather someone choosing all the broken super powerful stuff for themselves because they can. The rules allow it. So, time to change the rules? why play D&D? But if we take rules existing ELSEWHERE which are already established, being ToB, then we can say It's still the rules but now they apply here as well. Now they can't because it's in the rules.

Just different rules. But still D&D rules, not really even my rules. It'll take some leg work, but I think it can be done. Maneuvers work for everyone who takes them, so should spells. But the mechanic for maneuvers and taking them and using them is different for spells. It also works. The book itself even loosely calls maneuvers 'combat spells'. I don't see why it can't work. But then, I haven't been working with it enough to find out. Never know until I try though. :smallsmile:

Paulus
2010-04-23, 04:13 AM
**UPDATE**

For people interested, I'm currently ironing out the spell types to:
Buff
Strike or Strike (debuff)
Utility or Utility (delayed Strike)
For an example here is my current work on the Abjuration Utility section.
What this means thus far is this, by example, If you wanted to cast Guard and wards that day you would need at least two other abjuration (Utility) spells prepared or known including Guards and Wards. If I follow this reasoning of thought applying this to other spells would mean you would need say Four Abjuration (Strike or Strike Debuff) memorized that day or known to cast the more powerful Abjuration Strikes like Disjunction or Prismatic Sphere. It may increase in 'need to know or have memorize in order to use' to between 5 or 9. Maybe. Just off the top of my head depending on how much it will actually eat up a spell list to make the more powerful spells that much harder to have easily. This isn't set in stone and may change based on balance but this is currently what I am looking at and playing with trying to formalize a format which I will apply to the other schools.

Abjuration Utility Spells

Alarm
Abjuration (Utility)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 1
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 2 hours/level (D)

Hold Portal
Abjuration (Utility)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 1
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 1 min./level (D)

Arcane Lock
Abjuration (Utility)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 2, 1 Abjuration Utility spell.
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: Permanent

Obscure Object
Abjuration (Utility)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 2, 1 abjuration Utility spell
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 8 hours (D)

Explosive Runes
Abjuration [Force] (Utility- Delayed Strike)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 3, 2 Abjuration Utility spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: Permanent until discharged (D)

Fire Trap
Abjuration [Fire] (Utility – Delayed Strike)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 4, 2 Abjuration Utility spells
Casting Time: 10 minutes
Duration: Permanent until discharged (D)

Mordenkainen’s Private Sanctum
Abjuration (Utility)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 5, 3 Abjuration Utility spells
Casting Time: 10 minutes
Duration: 24 hours (D)

Guards and Wards
Abjuration (Utility)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 6, 3 abjuration Utility spells
Casting Time: 30 minutes
Duration: 2 hours/level (D)


Abjuration Buff Spells

Resistance
Abjuration (Buff)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 0
Duration: 1 minute

Mage Armor
Abjuration [Force] (Buff)
Level: Sor/Wiz 1
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 1 hour/level (D)

Shield
Abjuration [Force] (Buff)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 1
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 1 min./level (D)

Endure Elements
Abjuration (Buff)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 1
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 24 hours

Protection from Evil
Abjuration [Good] (Buff)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 1
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 1 min./level (D)
Protection from Chaos
Protection from Good
Protection from Law

Resist Energy
Abjuration (Buff)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 2, 1 Abjuration (Buff) spell
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 10 min./level

Protection from Arrows
Abjuration (Buff)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 2, 1 Abjuration (Buff) spell
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 1 hour/level or until discharged

Magic Circle against Evil
Abjuration [Good] (Buff)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 3, 2 Abjuration (Buff) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 10 min./level

Magic Circle against Good
Magic Circle against Law
Magic Circle against Chaos

Nondetection
Abjuration (Buff)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 3, 2 Abjuration (Buff) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 1 hour/level

Stoneskin
Abjuration (Buff)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 4, 3 Abjuration (Buff) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 10 min./level or until discharged

Globe of Invulnerability, Lesser
Abjuration (Buff)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 4, 3 Abjuration (Buff) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 1 round/level (D)

Antimagic Field
Abjuration (Buff)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 6, 4 Abjuration (Buff) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 10 min./level (D)

Globe of Invulnerability
Abjuration (Buff)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 6, 4 Abjuration (Buff) spells

Spell Turning
Abjuration (Buff)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 7, 5 Abjuration (Buff) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: Until expended or 10 min./level

Mind Blank
Abjuration (Buff)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 8, 5 Abjuration (Buff) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 24 hours

Protection from Spells
Abjuration (Buff)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 8, 5 Abjuration (Buff) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 10 min./level

Freedom
Abjuration (Buff)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 9, 5 Abjuration (Buff) Spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: Instantaneous


Abjuration Strike Spells

Dispel Magic
Abjuration (Strike)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 3
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: Instantaneous

Dimensional Anchor
Abjuration (Strike)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 4, 1 Abjuration (Strike) spell
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 1 min./level

Remove Curse
Abjuration (Strike)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 4, 1 Abjuration (Strike) spell
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: Instantaneous

Break Enchantment
Abjuration (Strike)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 5, 2 Abjuration (Strike) spells
Casting Time: 1 minute
Duration: Instantaneous

Dismissal
Abjuration (Strike)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 5, 2 Abjuration (Strike) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: Instantaneous

Dispel Magic, Greater
Abjuration (Strike)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 6, 3 Abjuration (Strike) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: Instantaneous

Repulsion
Abjuration (Strike)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 6, 3 Abjuration (Strike) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 1 round/level (D)

Banishment
Abjuration (Strike)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 7, 3 Abjuration (Strike) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: Instantaneous

Sequester
Abjuration (Strike)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 7, 3 Abjuration (Strike) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: One day/level (D)

Dimensional Lock
Abjuration (Strike)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 8, 4 Abjuration (Strike) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: One day/level

Prismatic Wall
Abjuration (Strike)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 8, 4 Abjuration (Strike) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 10 min./level (D)

Imprisonment
Abjuration (Strike)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 9, 5 Abjuration (Strike) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: Instantaneous

Mordenkainen’s Disjunction
Abjuration (Strike)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 9, 5 Abjuration (Strike) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: Instantaneous

Prismatic Sphere
Abjuration (Strike)
Prerequisites: Sor/Wiz 9, 5 Abjuration (Strike) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 10 min./level (D)


Hmm. Following my simplistic experimental formula I've added prerequisites to the Arcane Abjuration portion of the school and will be moving onto the Divine portion. Looking at this, I can already tell it may be more headache then it is worth for most people, specifically with book work, but then again that is what ToB is like and seeing as how I was trying to emulate ToB from the get go I think it would make more bookwork, but it is also a byproduct of a huge number of spells.

Looking ahead the first way I would like to test this is by making a Conjurer who has prepared Conjuration spells with Abjuration Spells to really buff up his summons/party and protect himself with some Divination spells prepared to see what he will be up against. This would be an experimental spell list for one day's worth of casting, just to see how all these prereqs work out in balancing power and over powerfulness. I know a Wizard who can cast Shield, Mage Armor and Stone Skin on his Summon can make on heck of a melee character, and casting it on themselves in the process for protection, but that's to be expected for a wizard focusing on such things.

I also have to test to see how preparing the same spell numerous times counts to fulfill the prerequisite, perhaps only allowing spells to count for themselves once, so you ARE able to prepare four of the high level spells if you want but you can't prepare four of the same high level spells to count as their own prerequisites. This should limit spell spam against saves a bit... and it would eat up spell level slots.

This is also why I feel the schools should be limited, since with prereqs a lot of your list will be eaten up with the specialization anyway, it will still allow classes that have specific access to that school better use of it then classes that don't have access. Meaning an evoker sorcerer may not be better then an evoker wizard because he is forced to have spells know instead of prepared which cuts down on his power, but this is balanced because he has less schools to worry about accessing anyway and thus giving him a school the wizard doesn't have access to will make him better at that option then a wizard in that regard. Since he is limited by both spells know and access, he at least is given access to a powerful school others are not. Like ToB has done.

I will of course have to play with this far more, experiment with it far more, and iron out some of the spells that just don' fit or are over powered themselves, but I at least want to make everyone aware of what I'm doing and what path I'm following. Since not many have given reasons themselves on why they would choose what schools go to whom, or at least have given but not responded to my questioning of it, I'll be following the splits I decided on as guidelines when I get to that portion of balancing... for now.

still open to the people who I asked to explain their reasoning by the by, and replies to my replies. I would like the community to be able to weigh in on such things if they don't mind explaining it to me or answering my questions about so I can understand, as thick as I am. :smallsmile:

Also, I would love to give everyone quicker results with this but my group only meets once a week and very often it takes us three hours to do a few rounds of combat -we are all old school and casual with a mix of 3.0 and 3.5 so it's hard to test new 3.5 stuff in the game. I apologize if anyone is frustrated with my lack of speed and understanding. I know I am not as good at this stuff as many other senior balancers in the playground, but as far as I have seen, I am the only one attempting to do this kind of adaptation so I expect it to be new frontier. Please bare with me, those that are interested, and thank you for your patience.

erikun
2010-04-23, 06:46 PM
Alright then, first quick question. What is it about the Wizard that makes Illusion and Enchantment inappropriate choices for him? What is it about the Sorcerer that makes Conjuration, Divination, Illusion, Necromancy, and Transmutation inappropriate? This is what I was trying to hit on earlier - you don't seem to be defining the classes, thus the division/restriction of schools looks arbitrary. If we had some idea what you considered a "Wizard" or a "Sorcerer", we could probably address what schools we felt best fits the concept. Without that, the only think I can hope to recommend in that vein are suggestions along the lines of Illusionist, Witch, and so on.

The Conjurer Wizard/Transmuter Wizard feels like another arbitrary divide. You've explained why you want it, although I'm not sure why you don't just have a Conjurer and a Transmuter.


But if we take rules existing ELSEWHERE which are already established, being ToB, then we can say It's still the rules but now they apply here as well. Now they can't because it's in the rules.
I don't wish to harp, but this logic doesn't follow. I mean, there are rules for a full-attack in D&D. However, if I came up with a sustem for "full-casting", it would not be any more supported by the system than anything else I've homebrewed. As you've noted yourself, your system will be making changes to all the spells individually.


As for the rules, it looks like you need (in general) one other spell of the school memorized to know the 2nd level spells, two other spells for the 3rd level spells, and so on. There are clearly some gaps, as there is not always a strike/buff/utility of a given level.

How does this interact with the Socerer's ability to relearn spells? Are the prerequisites only there for learning a spell?

It is hard to say if this would be balancing for a Wizard's spell slots, without giving it a try. It would be relatively easy to simply memorize one spell from a school at each level to qualify for the prerequisites easily, or memorize several low level spells for the prerequisites of a higher level one.

Paulus
2010-04-23, 07:40 PM
Alright then, first quick question. What is it about the Wizard that makes Illusion and Enchantment inappropriate choices for him? What is it about the Sorcerer that makes Conjuration, Divination, Illusion, Necromancy, and Transmutation inappropriate? This is what I was trying to hit on earlier - you don't seem to be defining the classes, thus the division/restriction of schools looks arbitrary. If we had some idea what you considered a "Wizard" or a "Sorcerer", we could probably address what schools we felt best fits the concept. Without that, the only think I can hope to recommend in that vein are suggestions along the lines of Illusionist, Witch, and so on.

The Conjurer Wizard/Transmuter Wizard feels like another arbitrary divide. You've explained why you want it, although I'm not sure why you don't just have a Conjurer and a Transmuter.


mm I though I had done well enough explaining my reasoning in my first post, as this isn't the case I'll break it down some more. The divides are factored by the ideal of the classes as we have them in the phb, yet also with awareness of the other classes as we have them. That is, A wizard is a wizard and a sorcerer is a sorcerer, so what makes a wizard a wizard and a sorcerer a sorcerer?

I also factored in what the long standing player base has come to know the classes as, so as not to deviate from the majority consensus of play. Such as a sorcerer being more of a class cannon and a wizard being more of a batman. Of course this could be undone by the fact I'm splitting the schools and can make them whatever I want, but I'd rather follow what others have come to know them as 'based on mechanics' when I change those mechanics to follow that trend of mechanics only to extreme specialization. For comfort level and familiarity.

I also factor in cultural identities of classes as was factored into them by the original creators of D&D and adapted by current culture. Such as a sorcerer being able to ensorcell someone, relying on a high charisma casting stat which would affect spells which affect personalities and wills. A sorcerer is better at enchanting because he has a strong force of personality and summons the power from his soul, thus having a strong will though it is not tied to Wis. To me at least, as I explained, it makes more sense that a high personality and willful character such as a Sorc would have better ability in enchanting then a wizard who is high int for his casting and therefore can be brilliant but absent minded, or quiet and stoic. He can have a strong will naturally, but a sorcerer is simply more likely too because of his outrageously strong personality translated from his high Cha which is needed by him to cast spells.

However a strong willed wizard is better applied to his ability to control the things he summons, seeing as they both attributed to dominating something with their minds. Yet to give a Wizard both Enchantment and Conjuration is too powerful as we have noted in the normal wizard, so a split must come from somewhere, and I feel a Wizard is more apt to be a conjurer then a Sorcerer, just as a Sorcerer is more apt to be an enchanter then a wizard. We also know that both enchantment and conjuration are very powerful schools. One could make a case that a class with solely Conjuration and Enchantment fits a very strong willed caster type. Which is what we already have in the current system. Yet a wizard need only have Int as his casting stat and need not bother with Wis (nor cha) at all. Meaning he would have a low will save, which doesn't make "sense".

So, since cha is all but linked to a strong will in the flavor text of 'soul and personality' yet also not because cha doesn't affect feats like 'indomitable soul' or 'iron will' it still makes more "sense" as is that Cha would be a more mind dominating based stat and therefore influence a caster's casting with high cha's casting stat then int would. Thus I can see a sorcerer being more a dominator of minds then a wizard.

However I do not dispute the Wizard ability to use sheer overwhelming intelligence, hence why they are such good Conjurers because they are smart enough to prepare magical fail safes so a test of wills is more likely to follow in their favor magically, thus attributed to Conjurations success with magic circles and such TO conjure demons and so forth.

Do you follow me? I would explain in much more depth if needed, but I thought I had done enough in my original post with my reasoning. If it still is not clear I would be happy to fully describe my entire process to clarify it based on each class.




I don't wish to harp, but this logic doesn't follow. I mean, there are rules for a full-attack in D&D. However, if I came up with a sustem for "full-casting", it would not be any more supported by the system than anything else I've homebrewed. As you've noted yourself, your system will be making changes to all the spells individually.

As for the rules, it looks like you need (in general) one other spell of the school memorized to know the 2nd level spells, two other spells for the 3rd level spells, and so on. There are clearly some gaps, as there is not always a strike/buff/utility of a given level.

How does this interact with the Socerer's ability to relearn spells? Are the prerequisites only there for learning a spell?


That because I'm not homebrewing a system of prerequisites to limit spells, it's more like I'm simply adapting the tome of battle system of prerequisites from maneuvers which have been likened to 'combat spells' in the book itself. Maneuvers are categorized into Boots, Strikes, Counters and Stances. With each category having a predesignated duration of Swift, Instantaneous, Until changed, and so on. Spells already have some balanced durations and some prerequisite based on level you can take them. Therefore to break the spells up even more into something akin to boosts, strikes etc need not be a question of duration, swift/immediate etc. But rather a means of limiting how many boots, strikes, and utility spells you can have.

There is also already a designated, 'prepared' and 'known' mechanic, so I don't have to adapt readied and known either. But I do need a way to have the limitations of know and redialed be adapted to spells. Therefore, if there is a limit on what spells you prepare and know I feel it is strongest served by knowing other spells of it's category (buff, Strike, Utility) to present an overall focuses in those types of spells on that day for prepared or in your life for known. Easy for know because if you spend your whole life focusing on a type of school, Abjuration for example, it would make sense as you learn more spells from that school you get better in it via practice, thereby trading spells out for newer spells the way maneuvers does and the mechanic is in place for spells know- you just simply must meet the prerequisites to do so now. Which would emulate the 'learning and practicing stronger spells by learning and practicing with weaker spells first'.

For wizards it is more of a mental focus problem. They have their minds set on preparing high level Abjuration Strike spells. So, to get use to the kind of magic completion that they would need in reserved, they cast weaker spells of the same type first, preparing them first, before they get to the bigger stuff. This keeps them in practice and goes on to show the ease in which they can handle such awe inspiring realty warping spells with a few hand gestures and words, having already prepared before hand by 'warming up' these mega spells with weaker spells of the same magical focus/school.

In other words if I want to cast a more complex lightening bolt (chain lightning), I warm up by pre-casting a lightening bolt (lightning bolt), so that through that practice it becomes easier to precast and keep ready a more complex lightning bolt. Wizard and other prepared casters have never had to do this before, and I feel they should, especially with the complexity of magic and the awesome power one can wield with it.

It worked in ToB with maneuvers in much the same way, more impressive physical feats can only be achieved with lesser impressive physical feats first as you train your body. The same should be done for a casters' mind. My adaptation keeps this in mind as I make these prerequisites adapted to the preexisting prepared and known mechanic. Does that make any sense?



It is hard to say if this would be balancing for a Wizard's spell slots, without giving it a try. It would be relatively easy to simply memorize one spell from a school at each level to qualify for the prerequisites easily, or memorize several low level spells for the prerequisites of a higher level one.

True, I don't want to make it too hard or different from the original way it was after all, but that at least forces you to take up spells slots on these types of spells instead of say, spells from other schools so you can't just cheery pick the most powerful and useful spells from schools even if you have access to them. The prereqs reflect the mental focus in these by preparing more and more from the same school, as opposed to simply memorizing spells from any school you like as long as you have the correct level.

It will need to be tested to see if this is effective, or even works, but it IS an experiment and if it actually turns out to work...? Well no one will know until somebody tries, so here is me giving it a go. And thank you for responding by the way. Please do so again! Also I'm not being sarcastic I'd just like to say, I'm being as sincere and genuine as possible, though I know it may not come off that way in text. I really appreciate everyone taking the time to help me with this even if I am bumbling my way through it because this is the first time I (or perhaps anyone) has attempted this. And it is certainly my first try at balancing anything so massive, so I don't have that much experience of understanding, as you have seen and said.

I just don't like how they 'fixed melee' in ToB yet left spell casting broken and moved onto 4E instead of trying to fix it, though I feel they have a perfectly good working mechanic in maneuvers that would apply to spells. Tome of Battle should not have been the end... but the beginning!

PlzBreakMyCmpAn
2010-04-23, 10:33 PM
Also, arbitrary as it may be no one would make that comment on ToB since it was designed that way in the first place.I'm fine with arbitrary. It leads to unexpected creativity. But I do see where you are going with this.


I will undoubtedly stand upon your shoulders for the work you and fellow Giants have done to balance a lot of what is broken.Cool. A link credit and a post after you go through it for anything you think I have missed would be good. And it wasn't for this forum. Its BG-ers. And I am really the one who did all the work (I credit the few ideas I use of others)


Well as I am only trying for core myself
[various classes]
I think big. Also on the more or less one school per class limitations I outlined, I am trying to keep an average of one school per base caster unless there is a reason not to. There aren't enough classes to do each permutation and hold the arcane-divine division. You could allow classes to chose, but then its not much of a nerf.


*cleric: abjuration and universal No Conjuration [healing]?nope. Otherwise no one would be a healer (just like without the nerf :smallcool:)


*druid: conjuration except (healing) As the only other source of divine healing in core, I don't see it as a stretch to allow them to heal. for full casters yes. Paladins heal as well. Also there is arcane healing for bards, pre-nerf. Druids don't need to be thrown a bone.


*favored souls: enchantment I don't know if I'd agree with this...Clerics already have that. Assuming roughly 1 school per class, this one is a tough nut to figure out.


wizard: abjuration and universal ouch. Universal is decent if the DM isn't dispel-happy and no other class gets the universal spells. But yeah ouch


wu-jen: transmutation I'd give them Evocation and enchantment, like an Eastern Sorcerer.

That's all I got off the top of my head, but I'd love to hear your reasoning for the selection you made! And also thanks for your help!There's only 1 wu-jen spell anyone knows. Guess the school :smallwink:

Paulus
2010-04-24, 12:28 AM
I'm fine with arbitrary. It leads to unexpected creativity. But I do see where you are going with this.

Glad at least somebody does. Maybe you could explain it to me too, when I get tired of groping in the dark. :smallwink:



Cool. A link credit and a post after you go through it for anything you think I have missed would be good. And it wasn't for this forum. Its BG-ers. And I am really the one who did all the work (I credit the few ideas I use of others)


Naturally, I wouldn't dream of taking all the credit for this outrageous failure akin to the titanic! Thanks for diving in! :smallbiggrin:



I think big. Also on the more or less one school per class limitations I outlined, I am trying to keep an average of one school per base caster unless there is a reason not to. There aren't enough classes to do each permutation and hold the arcane-divine division. You could allow classes to chose, but then its not much of a nerf.

Well tome of battle allows classes access to various schools so people can customize, I don't want every wizard to be a Abjurer with some universal thrown in. It seems too limited, like, saying a fighter can only use two weapons, one for close quarters and one for range. They may have great armor but it just isn't as fun as dual wielding, or throwing daggers, or doing spiked chain... of course most fighters just two hand anyway but still...
And while I'm just doing this for core I think the classes in core should be split evenly among the schools. Not counting the DMG mind you, just PhB.

If the formula I develop fro adapting ToB to Core phb works, it should certainly work for other classes too. But until I figure out my formula, I'll stick with experimenting with core phb. Though honestly I'd love for this to balance everything and work for any class... that would be beautiful... ah~ to dream.


nope. Otherwise no one would be a healer (just like without the nerf :smallcool:)
wait what? Of course no one would be a healer, they don't have access to Conjuration [healing]- oh wait you meant the class Healer it self I see. Well... I suppose this is true. But then again I bet they made the healer because nobody was taking healing with the classes that had it.
PC1:"Please heal me!"
PC2:"What why would I heal you?"
PC1:"because you're a FREAKIN' CLERIC!"
PC2: "Right. I'm a cleric. You know tank, and melee, caster and-OH rrriiiight I forgot I could heal myself! Huh, guess I never needed too. Look at that, oh hey! and look at this part, ha ha! it says I can transfer any spell I have into a healing spell, spontaneous healing, HAH! how quaint! But wait, you don't actually expect me to heal you with it do you? why!? I can just kill the baddie before it kills you!
PC1: But I'm the fighter, I'm suppose to fight,that's my job!
PC2: my god says you're wrong. If you were meant to fight, god would have given you healing! duh!
PC1: ARRRGHH I'm diiiieeeeiiinngggg- *
PC2: see? idiot. Now we'll have to find somebody to resurrect him. sheesh.
PC3: Don't look at me I'm a Paladin.
PC2: What? Where have you been?
PC3: ...behind you the whole time...
PC2: Oh I didn't see you there.

yeaaaahhh... that's why I don't think the cleric should be able to bring down divine wrath upon his foes in melee so effectively. In core phb he was listed as one of the only ones who could heal and do so all day. But since we don't want to pin this job on the cleric only, I'd allow druid to do it too, with a bit of bard maybe. That way at least SOMEONE in core can heal you.

I don't pity the Healer class honestly, it was made as a bandaid to what the cleric was suppose to be. You want a medic who can stand battle? It's almost like you'd want a person who could wear armor, wield a weapon, AND heal you. Like, in battle or something... oh hey look at the cleric description, imagine that...

Now I'm not one to force a role on anybody, but if you choose to be a cleric. Be a cleric. Not a Paladin without code restrictions and better spells.



for full casters yes. Paladins heal as well. Also there is arcane healing for bards, pre-nerf. Druids don't need to be thrown a bone.


thrown a bone? Oh no, this is to limit them. They can transmute all they want into several different animals all day, but since they have access to the school they should feel obligated to at least do a little healing. I might even take Abjuration away from them for this as a matter of fact, so they can't prevent damage and have to rely on healing even more. So they'll use it! That might even work for the cleric... hmmm...


Clerics already have that. Assuming roughly 1 school per class, this one is a tough nut to figure out.
It's been said abouts here that the Favored Soul is just a divine sorcerer, hence the spell mechanics on him. I'd follow this course to make him more distinct from the cleric who should be healing and give them Evocation and maybe Enchantment. Let them unleash the divine fury... from a distance... After all, they aren't Paladin's right?


Universal is decent if the DM isn't dispel-happy and no other class gets the universal spells. But yeah ouch
I see your point, but, I didn't see many universal spells in core. You may be thinking in mind about spells outside of core, which I wouldn't know to much about. So for now I'll nod blankly and keep it in mind. But at least in core, Universal alone isn't that powerful until higher levels. I think wizards need something to at least get them there if it is so powerful, according to core anyways. I'd give them at least Abjuration for sure, and Conjuration besides.

But I also don't want to see the druid as the only core transmuter, the only other class that is a likely candidate is sorcerer as bards are heavy on Illusion already. But again, I would see a Sorcerer as an Enchanter more then a Wizard. Thus leaving the Wizard the only other possible Transmuter, in core, phb. Though I suppose since bards also have Enchantment... I could see giving Sorcerer's a choice between transmutation or enchantment... But I'd need more convincing from an RP/concept/reasoning perspective.


There's only 1 wu-jen spell anyone knows. Guess the school :smallwink: Huh.. and here I thought they were suppose to be eastern masters of the elements, just not the elements we are use too. I guess transmutation would work for them. Really can't comment on this one... and I'll hold from doing so for all the other classes until I know my process/formula works. Otherwise, I shouldn't need to bother.

Thanks for your help though, I could use all I can get. Even if I do need it explained to me a few time to understand it. I appreciate those who take the time and have the patience to do so.

erikun
2010-04-24, 01:00 AM
Yes, the descriptions for Wizard and Sorcerer are helpful. Remember that not everyone `has come to know the classes` as the same stereotypes. I personally think of Wizards and knowledgeable, bookish types who try to hoard as much as possible. I think of Sorcerers as flashy spellcasters who have easier access to Use Magic Device. Neither concept really helps when trying to decide which class should access which spell schools.

Beyond that, if you're trying the system out on your own, why not give a prototype version of your system a try? I'm thinking something like a "spell school ladder" mechanism to learning or memorizing spells. For spontaneous casters, learning a spell above 1st requires you to have a spell of the same school memorized in the spell level below it. For example, a Sorcerer could only learn a 2nd level Evocation if they already know a 1st level Evocation, and could only learn a 9th level Necromancy spell if the already knew an 8th level Necromancy spell.

Prepared casters would act a bit differently. They would need to prepare one spell of each spell level lower in the same school to prepare a higher level spell. For example, to prepare Prismatic Sphere (9th level Abjuration) they would need to prepare at least one Abjuration spell in all spell levels 1st-8th. If they choose to prepare later in the day - spellcasters may leave some slots empty and prepare them at a later time - then they need to rebuild the "ladder" from any spells they have cast. If a Druid prepared a single Summon Monster at each level and then cast the first level one, they would need to memorize another 1st level Conjuration before memorizing any higher level Conjurations.

It doesn't restrict access to schools like your system does and it nerfs Sorcerers pretty hard (who really need versatility), but the Sorcerer nerf is inherit in your system anyways. It might also give you an idea on how well your system would work, after implementing the memorization changes.

Paulus
2010-04-24, 08:07 PM
My subscription to thread isn't working... bah!


Yes, the descriptions for Wizard and Sorcerer are helpful. Remember that not everyone `has come to know the classes` as the same stereotypes. I personally think of Wizards and knowledgeable, bookish types who try to hoard as much as possible. I think of Sorcerers as flashy spellcasters who have easier access to Use Magic Device. Neither concept really helps when trying to decide which class should access which spell schools.

Actually they do, if you consider the description for each school. For instance, I feel Evocation is far flashier then say Divination and Divination is far more bookish/hoard knowledgeish then Evocation. Do you see what I mean? And not everyone follows the stereotype, but like all stereotypes good or bad, there is always some reason for them. Sorcerer's probably use evocation more then other classes because they are seen as flashy, have the spells slots to make it effective, and have the sheer overwhelming personality and audacity to juggle fireballs while laughing. Or at least... they would be more likely too then a wizard. It's not the sole factor, but it is a reasonable factor.



Beyond that, if you're trying the system out on your own, why not give a prototype version of your system a try? I'm thinking something like a "spell school ladder" mechanism to learning or memorizing spells. For spontaneous casters, learning a spell above 1st requires you to have a spell of the same school memorized in the spell level below it. For example, a Sorcerer could only learn a 2nd level Evocation if they already know a 1st level Evocation, and could only learn a 9th level Necromancy spell if the already knew an 8th level Necromancy spell.

Prepared casters would act a bit differently. They would need to prepare one spell of each spell level lower in the same school to prepare a higher level spell. For example, to prepare Prismatic Sphere (9th level Abjuration) they would need to prepare at least one Abjuration spell in all spell levels 1st-8th. If they choose to prepare later in the day - spellcasters may leave some slots empty and prepare them at a later time - then they need to rebuild the "ladder" from any spells they have cast. If a Druid prepared a single Summon Monster at each level and then cast the first level one, they would need to memorize another 1st level Conjuration before memorizing any higher level Conjurations.

It doesn't restrict access to schools like your system does and it nerfs Sorcerers pretty hard (who really need versatility), but the Sorcerer nerf is inherit in your system anyways. It might also give you an idea on how well your system would work, after implementing the memorization changes.

It's close to what I'm doing and actually more restrictive a mechanic then my own. Whereby you force a caster to fill up spell slots with spells to achieve the higher level of a school and therefore must specialize in that school, my system (tob adaptation) already splits the schools and allows spells to count for each other in a natural progression as you level, or rather, the higher level you are the better able you are to use more higher level spells without having to always use lower level spells. It denotes a good level of progress and familiarity with the school one is already forced choose to specialize in.

The only problem I see with your ladder method is again cheery picking and combining the best schools for super powerful characters. They would have less utility and little tricks thanks to the room eaten up by specializing in one spell from each school per level to reach the higher level spells, but they could still pull of more of the game breaking combos. Especially with the way current spell casting works with feats and metamagic. However this is NOT to say the ladder method doesn't work or is even better then my own formula. I am merely saying I don't think I'll try it until I find out the tob adaptation method doesn't work. You can certainly try it though, and if you let me know your results, we can compare the effectiveness of the Erikun's Ladder to the Tob adaptation! :smallsmile:

When I've finished with Abjuration my next step is to tackle Conjuration. In this way I can make a Conjurer Wizard with the system and see how it all works. Abjuration really compliments Conjuration, so I feel a Conjuration, Divination, Abjuration, Universal Wizard would be one of the strongest examples of the Wizard class. It all perfectly screams Wizard, with good stuff all around for them and their party.


**UPDATE***

I've finished prerequisite Divine Abjuration Utility and Strike spells and will be moving onto Buffs next... but I've got to say I'm having trouble figuring out where domains fit in. I might just say they are god granted without prerequisites, but I don't know how well that makes or breaks the system... Any suggestions or insights would be welcome.

Roc Ness
2010-04-24, 08:27 PM
Nice. :smallsmile: Still watching with interest.

Although I have to say, it would make the prepared casters a little more annoying. Although then I say to myself: I hated playing prepared casters anyway.

Paulus
2010-04-24, 08:50 PM
Nice. :smallsmile: Still watching with interest.

Although I have to say, it would make the prepared casters a little more annoying. Although then I say to myself: I hated playing prepared casters anyway.

Annoying at least until you got the hang of the mechanic. Then it would require only a few glances at what you want, and what you have, just as character creation is for Tome of Battle.

Prepared casters also have a great deal of variety, and it isn't an easy class to play regardless, but it can be one of the most powerful ones if you are willing to learn the mechanic. The same should hold true for this adaptation, especially if you compare the same situation to Normal melee vs. Maneuvers. Wasn't easy to learn the new mechanic, but if you did (and it was allowed in your game) it certainly boosted your power.

I do, however, begin to feel that it may be more headache then it is worth for most people and that regardless if it works or not many people may not bother to try and learn it, especially since they can be as powerful as they want within the normal rules. Still, the idea that maybe some DM somewhere will see it and want to try it (if it even works, but lets say it did for this example) and will tell his players if they want to play a prepared caster they need to learn these new rules. Well that makes spontaneous casters more desirable too, and if this makes it so no one wants to play a prepared caster in a casual game... well... that just makes it easier for those casual melee characters to stand a chance doesn't it? :smallsmile:

Conjecture aside. I really am hoping this will work and that people all over the playground (and beyond?) will be able to adapt it to their games so it makes D&D 3.5 more balanced and fun or at the least, gives 3.5 players something new to play with... since 3.5 is supposedly 'making room' for 4E.

On that note: I've finished Prerequisiteing all Arcane and Divine Abjuration. Now I need only prereq the Bard list and the entire school should be done. I am STILL at a loss for how to treat Domain's however... Do they remain god granted and thus outside of prereqs? Any input or insight would be welcome. :smallsmile: Thanks for sticking with me folks.

WARNING: WALL OF LIST TEXT!

Divine Abjuration---------------------------------------Divine Abjuration

Fire Trap
Abjuration [Fire] (Utility – Delayed Strike)
Level: Drd 2
Casting Time: 10 minutes
Duration: Permanent until discharged (D)

Glyph of Warding
Abjuration (Utility)
Level: Clr 3
Casting Time: 10 minutes
Duration: Permanent until discharged (D)

Obscure Object
Abjuration (Utility)
Level: Clr 3
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 8 hours (D)

Atonement
Abjuration (Utility)
Prerequisites: Clr 5, Drd 5, 1 Abjuration (Utility) spell
Casting Time: 1 hour
Duration: Instantaneous

Forbiddance
Abjuration (Utility)
Level: Clr 6, 2 Abjuration (Utility) spells
Casting Time: 6 rounds
Duration: Permanent

Glyph of Warding, Greater
Abjuration (Utility)
Level: Clr 6, 3 Abjuration (Utility) Spells

---------------

Resistance
Abjuration (Buff)
Level: Clr 0, Drd 0, Pal 1,
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 1 minute

Remove Fear
Abjuration (Buff)
Level: Clr 1, 1 Abjuration (Buff) spell
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 10 minutes; see text

Protection from Evil
Abjuration [Good] (Buff)
Level: Clr 1, 1 Abjuration (Buff) spell, Good 1, Pal 1
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 1 min./level (D)

Protection from Chaos
Abjuration [Lawful] (Buff)
Level: Clr 1, 1 Abjuration (Buff) spell, Law 1, Pal 1

Protection from Good
Abjuration [Evil] (Buff)
Level: Clr 1, 1 Abjuration (Buff) Spell Evil 1

Protection from Law
Abjuration [Chaotic] (Buff)
Level: Chaos 1, 1 Abjuration (Buff) Spell, Clr 1

Sanctuary
Abjuration (Buff)
Level: Clr 1, 1 Abjuration (Buff) spells Protection 1
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 1 round/level

Shield of Faith
Abjuration (Buff)
Level: Clr 1, 1 Abjuration (Buff) spell
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 1 min./level

Endure Elements
Abjuration (Buff)
Level: Clr 1, 1 Abjuration (buff) spell, Drd 1, Pal 1, Rgr 1, Sun 1
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 24 hours

Hide from Animals
Abjuration (Buff)
Level: Drd 1, Rgr 1
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 10 min./level (D)

Entropic Shield
Abjuration (Buff)
Level: Clr 1, 1 Abjuration (Buff) Spell Luck 1
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 1 min./level (D)

Hide from Undead
Abjuration (Buff)
Level: Clr 1, 1 Abjuration (buff) spell
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 10 min./level (D)

Undetectable Alignment
Abjuration (Buff)
Level: Clr 2, 2 Abjuration (buff) spells, Pal 2 1 abjuration (buff) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 24 hours

Resist Energy
Abjuration (Buff)
Level: Clr 2, 2 Abjuration (Buff) spells, Drd 2 1 Abjuration (buff) spell, Fire 3, Pal 2, 1 Abjuration (buff) spell, Rgr 1
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 10 min./level

Shield Other
Abjuration (Buff)
Level: Clr 2, 2 Abjuration (Buff) spells, Pal 2, 1 Abjuration (Buff) spell, Protection 2
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 1 hour/level (D)

Protection from Energy
Abjuration (Buff)
Level: Clr 3, 3 Abj(buff) spells, Drd 3, 2 abj (Buff) spells, 1 Abj (Buff) spells, Luck 3, Protection 3, Rgr 2, 1 Abj (Buff) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 10 min./level or until discharged

Magic Circle against Evil
Abjuration [Good] (Buff)
Level: Clr 3, 3 Abj (Buff) spells, Good 3, Pal 3, 2 Abj (Buff) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 10 min./level

Magic Circle against Good
Abjuration [Evil] (Buff)
Level: Clr 3, 3 Abj (Buff) spells, Evil 3

Magic Circle against Law
Abjuration [Chaotic] (Buff)
Level: Chaos 3, Clr 3, 3 Abj (Buff) spells

Freedom of Movement
Abjuration (Buff)
Level: Clr 4, 4 Abj (Buff) spells, Drd 4, 3 Abj (Buff) spells, Luck 4, Rgr 4, 3 Abj (Buff) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 10 min./level

Nondetection
Abjuration (Buff)
Level: Rgr 4, 3 Abj (Buff) spells Trickery 3
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 1 hour/level

Antiplant Shell
Abjuration (Buff)
Level: Drd 4, 3 Abj (Buff) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 10 min./level (D)

Spell Immunity
Abjuration (Buff)
Level: Clr 4, 4 Abj (Buff) spells Protection 4, Strength 4
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 10 min./level

Spell Resistance
Abjuration (Buff)
Level: Clr 5, 4 Abj (Buff) spells, Magic 5, Protection 5
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 1 min./level

Stoneskin
Abjuration (Buff)
Level: Drd 5, 4 Abj (Buff) Spells, Earth 6,
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 10 min./level or until discharged

Antilife Shell
Abjuration (Buff)
Level: Animal 6, Clr 6, 5 Abj (Buff) spells, Drd 6, 4 Abj (Buff) Spells
Casting Time: 1 round
Duration: 10 min./level (D)

Spell Turning
Abjuration (Buff)
Level: Luck 7, Magic 7
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: Until expended or 10 min./level

Cloak of Chaos
Abjuration [Chaotic] (Buff)
Level: Chaos 8, Clr 8, 6 Abj (Buff) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 1 round/level (D)

Holy Aura
Abjuration [Good] ( Buff)
Level: Clr 8, 6 Abj (Buff) spells Good 8
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 1 round/level (D)

Shield of Law
Abjuration [Lawful] (Buff)
Level: Clr 8, 6 Abj (Buff) spells, Law 8
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 1 round/level (D)

Spell Immunity, Greater
Abjuration (Buff)
Level: Clr 8, 6 Abj (Buff) spells

Antimagic Field
Abjuration (Buff)
Level: Clr 8, 6 Abj (Buff) spells, Magic 6, Protection 6
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 10 min./level (D)

Mind Blank
Abjuration (Buff)
Level: Protection 8, 6 Abj (Buff) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 24 hours

Protection from Spells
Abjuration (Buff)
Level: Magic 8, 6 Abj (Buff) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 10 min./level

Unholy Aura
Abjuration [Evil] (Buff)
Level: Clr 8, 6 Abjuration (Buff) spells Evil 8
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 1 round/level (D)

-------------

Dispel Magic
Abjuration (Strike)
Level: Clr 3, Drd 4, Magic 3, Pal 3
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: Instantaneous

Remove Curse
Abjuration (Strike)
Level: Clr 3, Pal 3
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: Instantaneous

Repel Vermin
Abjuration (Strike)
Level: Clr 4, 2 Abjuration (Strike) spells, Drd 4, Rgr 3,
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 10 min./level (D)

Dismissal
Abjuration (Strike)
Level: Clr 4, 2 Abjuration (Strike Spell)
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: Instantaneous

Dimensional Anchor
Abjuration (Strike)
Level: Clr 4, 2 abjuration (Strike) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 1 min./level

Break Enchantment
Abjuration (Strike)
Level: Clr 5, 3 Abjuration (strike) spells, Luck 5, Pal 4, 2 Abjuration (Strike) spells
Casting Time: 1 minute
Duration: Instantaneous

Dispel Chaos
Abjuration [Lawful] (Strike)
Level: Clr 5, 3 Abjuration (Strike) spells, Law 5, Pal 4 2 Abjuration (Strike) spells

Dispel Evil
Abjuration [Good] (Strike)
Level: Clr 5, 3 Abjuration (Strike) spells, Good 5, Pal 4 2 Abjuration (Strike) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 1 round/level or until discharged, whichever comes first

Dispel Good
Abjuration [Evil] (Strike)
Level: Clr 5, 3 Abjuration (Strike) spells, Evil 5

Dispel Law
Abjuration [Chaotic] (Strike)
Level: Chaos 5, Clr 5, 3 Abjuration (Strike) spells

Banishment
Abjuration (Strike)
Level: Clr 6, 4 Abjuration (Strike) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: Instantaneous

Dispel Magic, Greater
Abjuration (Strike)
Level: Clr 6, 4 Abjuration (Strike) spells, Drd 6, 2 Abjuration (Strike) spells

Repulsion
Abjuration (Strike)
Level: Clr 7, 5 Abjuration (Strike) spells, Protection 7
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 1 round/level (D)

Repel Metal or Stone
Abjuration [Earth] (Strike)
Level: Drd 8, 3 Abjuration (Strike) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: 1 round/level (D)

Dimensional Lock
Abjuration (Strike)
Level: Clr 8, 5 Abjuration (strike) spells
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: One day/level

Mordenkainen’s Disjunction
Abjuration (Strike)
Level: Magic 9
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Duration: Instantaneous

Prismatic Sphere
Abjuration (Strike)
Level: Protection 9, Sun 9


EDIT: GASP! I've been moved! Well... I guess I should have expected this. I don't blame the mods, it IS a sort of homebrew kind of gig, but I had originally posted it in the RPgeneral so I could get peoples' say on the RP concepts, preservatives, and reasoning they had. To keep the thread alive however I did start introducing aspects that were more 'homebrew' then RPGeneral. Well... at least I got some input. So I guess it was inevitable I'd end up here. oh well, no worries then. Hello Homebrew! :smallsmile: