centuriancode
2010-12-09, 11:57 PM
I'm putting together a campaign for 3.5 and I'm trying to figure out a way to alter the rules for magic a little so that casters aren't quite as superior to non-casters as they are in the rules as written. I want to maintain the versatility of the 3.5 magic system (4th ed, in my opinion, kills off that versatility and therefore kills of the point of being a caster leaving only severely weakened blaster-casters behind). In short, this is an attempt at a more subtle rebalancing, whilst maintaining the viability and fun of primary casters.
I apologise in advance, this is going to be wordy and poorly laid out.
Part 1: Casting DC and the Casting Roll
In order to cast spells, all casters will have to succeed on a check against the casting DC, which will be derived as follows:
DC = 11 + Caster Level + Miscellaneous Modifiers
The Miscellaneous modifiers would be added by the DM as required. This could represent things like magic dampening fields (though not outright cancellation - that would function as normal), distractions, or the DM just feeling that the spell would probably be unhelpful to the campaign. The current spell failure due to armour could be added in to this, thereby removing the need to roll separately for it. This would be at a rate of +1 to DC per 5% spell failure chance.
For the purposes of the Casting DC, the Caster Level is variable. If a character wanted to cast a spell, but more weakly than usual, they could reduce their effective caster level. Alternatively, if they wanted to make a spell more likely to succeed, they could do the same thing. This would result in weaker effects of the spell, but the probability of the spell succeeding would be higher.
The purpose of this is to make it approximately as difficult to cast spells as it is to succeed on attack rolls. For that reason, the roll to pass the Casting DC would be made up of the following:
d20 + Ability modifier + Caster Level + Equipment Bonus + Miscellaneous Bonus
Primary Casters have their Caster Level equal to their HD, just as primary mêlée characters have a BAB equal to their HD. Secondary and Support Casters have a Caster Level that is a fraction of their HD, just as Secondary and Support Non-Casters have a BAB equal to a fraction of their HD. That is how I arrived at the components of the Casting Roll.
NOTE: For the roll to beat the Casting DC, the character's Caster Level is constant. It remains at maximum regardless of how it alters for the purposes of determining the Casting DC.
An example of how this would work is below:
A 3rd Level Sorceror (Caster Level 3) with Charisma of 16 (+3) wishes to cast Magic Missile (cast at Caster Level 3 for maximal effect) on a giant rat. Because s/he's stupid, s/he's wearing Chain Mail (Spell Failure Chance 30%). The Sorceror is wearing a headband that gives +1 to casting attempts.
DC: 11 + 3 (Caster Level) + 6 (Armour) = 20
Roll: 13 (d20) + 3 (Caster Level) + 3 (Ability Modifier) + 1 (Item Bonus) = 20, so the spell is cast successfully, even though Sorcerors should not wear armour.
This is similar in concept to the 4th ed. attack roll when casting spells, but hopefully executed a bit better. In addition, if the spell is not successfully cast, then it is not lost (except at the DM's discretion, should s/he choose to include an additional effect to make a dungeon harder). Only successfully cast spells are used up from the spells for the day list. Failed concentration checks, however, will still lose the spell. This is because a failed casting check represents a caster being unable even to summon the magic for the spell, whereas a failed concentration check represents the caster losing control of the magic summoned.
Part 2: Interaction of the Casting Roll with Saves and Pre-Existing Attack Rolls
The major problem that I see with this system is how the Casting Roll interacts with spells that already have either a save or an Attack Roll. It would be unfair to effeectively make a caster attack twice with a spell for no apparent reason. What seems (to me, at any rate) to be an equitable solution is as follows.
If a ranged touch attack would be required, then add the following to the Casting DC:
Target's Touch AC - 10 - Caster's Dexterity Modifier
My reasoning for this is that 10 points of the Touch AC are already accounted for in the Casting DC ("11 + Spell Level + ... "), and the Caster's Dexterity Modifier would normally have made the attack roll easier, so the same should be true of the Casting Roll. This could potentially mean that the above addition to the Casting DC for certain spells would be negative, thereby reducing the DC. This is not, to my mind, a problem, because that reflects that it's a lot easier to hit an Hill Giant with an Acid Arrow than it is to hit a mouse wit the same spell. This would mean that the Caster would not have to worry as much about the accuracy of the spell, which would make it easier to cast. Sloppiness would be more acceptable.
For most spells with a Will Save, such as Dominate Person, I think that it makes sense that the save becomes a contested check. What the caster rolls to cast the spell (assuming that it is successfully cast) versus a normal save roll (in the case of Dominate Person, a Will Save).
If a spell creates an effect that then acts upon the target, even after the caster has finished with the spell (Poison, for example), then I have been thinking that the Casting Roll would function as usual. The target would then make saves as normal, but against the effect rather than the spell (so, after a Druid successfully casts Poison on a Fighter, the Druid no longer matters. The Fighter would then make Fortitude saves every turn to try to fight off the Poison).
For Reflex saves, I would leave the present system alone and simply tack a Casting DC on the front. I have considered adding the amount the caster succeeded by onto the DC of the Reflex saves, but I do not think that would be necessary. The action of the caster to conjure up a Fireball is entirely separate to the action of the target in trying to dodge it. If it were a customised Fireball that the caster guided towards the target, then it would fall under the rules for an Attack Roll, rather than Reflex save, but for the normal spell I think that the less done to Reflex saves, the better. They seem to be working quite well.
Which category any particular spell falls in, if not made clear by the rules the spell would function under in the normal magic system, would be the DM's call. It's not ideal to leave confusion as to categories, but it would also take far too long (without sufficient benefit) to go through every single spell Wizards has released.
Part 3: Save or Die
For me, one of the greatest unbalancing effects on the 3.5 magic system is the presence of the Save or Die spells. These are spells that are almost impossible for non-casters, or even support casters, to match in terms of destructive potential. Vorpal Weapons can come close, but have nowhere near the reliability of Save or Die spells.
I am not sure how I would deal with these spells, though. Preferably, I would like to avoid simply removing them altogether, as they do have an in game purpose, though if another solution cannot be found and they are too potent to be usable in game, then I would resort to it. Exchanging the instant kill effect for a very large amount of damage is another option, though again it does not seem like an especially good one as casters that have access to Save or Die spells generally already have access to high damage spells. For this section in particular, I appeal to the playground homebrewers for help.
So, what do you think?
I apologise in advance, this is going to be wordy and poorly laid out.
Part 1: Casting DC and the Casting Roll
In order to cast spells, all casters will have to succeed on a check against the casting DC, which will be derived as follows:
DC = 11 + Caster Level + Miscellaneous Modifiers
The Miscellaneous modifiers would be added by the DM as required. This could represent things like magic dampening fields (though not outright cancellation - that would function as normal), distractions, or the DM just feeling that the spell would probably be unhelpful to the campaign. The current spell failure due to armour could be added in to this, thereby removing the need to roll separately for it. This would be at a rate of +1 to DC per 5% spell failure chance.
For the purposes of the Casting DC, the Caster Level is variable. If a character wanted to cast a spell, but more weakly than usual, they could reduce their effective caster level. Alternatively, if they wanted to make a spell more likely to succeed, they could do the same thing. This would result in weaker effects of the spell, but the probability of the spell succeeding would be higher.
The purpose of this is to make it approximately as difficult to cast spells as it is to succeed on attack rolls. For that reason, the roll to pass the Casting DC would be made up of the following:
d20 + Ability modifier + Caster Level + Equipment Bonus + Miscellaneous Bonus
Primary Casters have their Caster Level equal to their HD, just as primary mêlée characters have a BAB equal to their HD. Secondary and Support Casters have a Caster Level that is a fraction of their HD, just as Secondary and Support Non-Casters have a BAB equal to a fraction of their HD. That is how I arrived at the components of the Casting Roll.
NOTE: For the roll to beat the Casting DC, the character's Caster Level is constant. It remains at maximum regardless of how it alters for the purposes of determining the Casting DC.
An example of how this would work is below:
A 3rd Level Sorceror (Caster Level 3) with Charisma of 16 (+3) wishes to cast Magic Missile (cast at Caster Level 3 for maximal effect) on a giant rat. Because s/he's stupid, s/he's wearing Chain Mail (Spell Failure Chance 30%). The Sorceror is wearing a headband that gives +1 to casting attempts.
DC: 11 + 3 (Caster Level) + 6 (Armour) = 20
Roll: 13 (d20) + 3 (Caster Level) + 3 (Ability Modifier) + 1 (Item Bonus) = 20, so the spell is cast successfully, even though Sorcerors should not wear armour.
This is similar in concept to the 4th ed. attack roll when casting spells, but hopefully executed a bit better. In addition, if the spell is not successfully cast, then it is not lost (except at the DM's discretion, should s/he choose to include an additional effect to make a dungeon harder). Only successfully cast spells are used up from the spells for the day list. Failed concentration checks, however, will still lose the spell. This is because a failed casting check represents a caster being unable even to summon the magic for the spell, whereas a failed concentration check represents the caster losing control of the magic summoned.
Part 2: Interaction of the Casting Roll with Saves and Pre-Existing Attack Rolls
The major problem that I see with this system is how the Casting Roll interacts with spells that already have either a save or an Attack Roll. It would be unfair to effeectively make a caster attack twice with a spell for no apparent reason. What seems (to me, at any rate) to be an equitable solution is as follows.
If a ranged touch attack would be required, then add the following to the Casting DC:
Target's Touch AC - 10 - Caster's Dexterity Modifier
My reasoning for this is that 10 points of the Touch AC are already accounted for in the Casting DC ("11 + Spell Level + ... "), and the Caster's Dexterity Modifier would normally have made the attack roll easier, so the same should be true of the Casting Roll. This could potentially mean that the above addition to the Casting DC for certain spells would be negative, thereby reducing the DC. This is not, to my mind, a problem, because that reflects that it's a lot easier to hit an Hill Giant with an Acid Arrow than it is to hit a mouse wit the same spell. This would mean that the Caster would not have to worry as much about the accuracy of the spell, which would make it easier to cast. Sloppiness would be more acceptable.
For most spells with a Will Save, such as Dominate Person, I think that it makes sense that the save becomes a contested check. What the caster rolls to cast the spell (assuming that it is successfully cast) versus a normal save roll (in the case of Dominate Person, a Will Save).
If a spell creates an effect that then acts upon the target, even after the caster has finished with the spell (Poison, for example), then I have been thinking that the Casting Roll would function as usual. The target would then make saves as normal, but against the effect rather than the spell (so, after a Druid successfully casts Poison on a Fighter, the Druid no longer matters. The Fighter would then make Fortitude saves every turn to try to fight off the Poison).
For Reflex saves, I would leave the present system alone and simply tack a Casting DC on the front. I have considered adding the amount the caster succeeded by onto the DC of the Reflex saves, but I do not think that would be necessary. The action of the caster to conjure up a Fireball is entirely separate to the action of the target in trying to dodge it. If it were a customised Fireball that the caster guided towards the target, then it would fall under the rules for an Attack Roll, rather than Reflex save, but for the normal spell I think that the less done to Reflex saves, the better. They seem to be working quite well.
Which category any particular spell falls in, if not made clear by the rules the spell would function under in the normal magic system, would be the DM's call. It's not ideal to leave confusion as to categories, but it would also take far too long (without sufficient benefit) to go through every single spell Wizards has released.
Part 3: Save or Die
For me, one of the greatest unbalancing effects on the 3.5 magic system is the presence of the Save or Die spells. These are spells that are almost impossible for non-casters, or even support casters, to match in terms of destructive potential. Vorpal Weapons can come close, but have nowhere near the reliability of Save or Die spells.
I am not sure how I would deal with these spells, though. Preferably, I would like to avoid simply removing them altogether, as they do have an in game purpose, though if another solution cannot be found and they are too potent to be usable in game, then I would resort to it. Exchanging the instant kill effect for a very large amount of damage is another option, though again it does not seem like an especially good one as casters that have access to Save or Die spells generally already have access to high damage spells. For this section in particular, I appeal to the playground homebrewers for help.
So, what do you think?