3.5 How much would you need to take away to make a Magician beatable by a Warrior?

[INoKnowNames]

And please note I use those terms very loosely.

I'm also aware of how controversial and flame-bait ridden this view can be.

I'm certainly not going to be able to do it now, nor will I be able to do it later. It'll probably be months from now that I can consider it, simply because of my own inexperience, since such a project would require quite a bit of planning, and I've yet to finish any of my first games.

However, I would like to try my hand at being a Dungeon Master. And one of the first ideas for a story that popped up would be the normal people vs. the spell casters. That the way of the Sword and Fist was being threatened by a recent surge in Magic, and to maintain their way of life, that warriors from all sorts of backgrounds would need to work together to defeat the combined threat. I'm not sure how divine magic might be handled, but so far, I'm thinking outright Magic vs. Mundane*.

*random note, and I'm not sure how much flame bait this adds to the conversation, but everything from the Tome of Battle would be re-classified as Ex for the sake of this campaign. Even Desert Wind and Shadow Hand. I'll need to mull this over, actually. Might be a -bit- too much blending of mystic and martial there... although that makes me wonder about Hex and Dusk blades.

But that's quite a bit of an uphill battle, assuming it's even possible. The optimized Wizard doesn't even have to fight you one on one, and can still ruin your sense of perception enough for you to be completely unaware of how horrifyingly beaten you actually are.

So how much would need to be taken away from a Wizard to make a Warblade a decent challenge, if not an outright threat? The balance of power I'm looking for is somewhere between Grease and Teleport, at least in terms of spell levels. I'm not sure where, though... and there are certainly plenty of issues in between the two.

And despite there being even more mundane lower tier classes, I'll probably keep my aim somewhere about this point. If only because I have such a crush on the Tome of Battle. Although other classes could certainly receive a boost if possible...

I feel like one thing that might need to be changed in this game is magic items, at least how they're created. Requiring rare ingredients rather than spells known, for example. And maybe some of the trickier mage abilities can be reasonably countered with upgraded skill usage... I’m thinking the overall theme of the world would be more technology and culture related, possibly more mimicking our earth, I guess, rather than being… Middle Earth, so to speak.

If it's too much to even consider, and I know at the very least there isn't a single 9th level spell I'd consider letting them have, let alone most 8th and 7th level spells, I might just drop this idea. But I wanted to ask how much do you think might have to go into it to make it workable.

And it is a bit hard to figure out where exactly things like the Bard and the Paladin fit in this kind of world...

Not revolutionizing anything. Just looking to see how... compatible, for lack of a better word, this idea could be for the sake of a future dm's possible campaign.

Hopefully this thread won't be locked and imprisoned by the time I get home from work...

[deuxhero]

Take away this and you've done it


Spells
A wizard casts arcane spells which are drawn from the sorcerer/wizard spell list. A wizard must choose and prepare her spells ahead of time (see below).

[NeoSeraphi]

Remove bonus spells per day, bonus spell slots for being a specialist wizard, and change the duration of all negative debuff effects to 1 round on a failed save, ignored completely if a successful save. That way, a wizard can exchange one action for one round of an opponent's actions, and he has a lot fewer times per day to do it.

Additionally, change the duration of all spells with a duration other than instantaneous or permanent to one round. Make magic a very flashy, instantaneous effect. This almost completely negates the benefit of staple control spells like black tentacles and glitterdust, while keeping the value of blasting and other instantaneous effects. Summons are useful in a pinch but they are really just a waste of an action, and most buffs become entirely unhelpful.

Suddenly, clerics are left to do not much but heal and wizards have few options save blasting and short term debuffs. Their magic is still potent, but it's not one spell ends the battle anymore.

Ban all metamagic feats. Every single one.

Remove the permanency spell from the game.

Spells that resurrect the dead as undead, such as animate dead and create undead, now have a duration of 1 hour/level. Useful as minions, but not enough to build an army. Additionally, a caster can only control 1 HD of undead/caster level. Zombies are treated as having 1/2 their HD for the purposes of this limitation.

Immediate actions of all kinds are banned. No counters for ToB, no Abrupt Jaunt, no celerity. The sole exception to this ban is feather fall, which may still be cast at any time as a free action.

You may not cast more than one spell per round, even if you would be able to do so. This limits the usefulness of swift action spells and the Quicken Spell feat, though they still have their uses.

Save DCs for all spells are capped at 20+spell level. This prevents a character from gaining too much benefit out of DC min/maxing, like Spell Focus/Greater Spell Focus/36 Int/Minor Esoterica (Illusion)/Shadow Weave Magic, etc.

All illusion spells grant a saving throw to Disbelieve when they are first seen. If a creature fails his saving throw against this effect, he does not get another saving throw from seeing the effect, though he still gets a save if an ally points out its not real or if he interacts with it, as usual.

Charm person and charm monsters' effects are now instantaneous, and simply increase the affected creature's attitude towards the caster by 2 categories, to a maximum of helpful. Dominate person and dominate monster become 3rd and 6th level spells, respectively, and have their duration shortened to 1 round as per the rules stated above. They otherwise function as normal.

The DC for a Concentration check to cast defensively is 40+spell level.

There, try that. That might help even the playing field a little bit.

[The-Mage-King]

A more helpful way is to par them down to the "specialist" spontaneous casters. So instead of wizards specializing in necromancy, you have Dread Necromancers. Instead of evokers, you have Warmages. Instead of... Well, you get the picture.


I'd suggest looking over these homebrew "tier 3" casters for ideas, too.

Summoner (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=181483)

Teleporter (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=168948)

Barrier Mage (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=177861)


Probably a few more floating around, too, but those were the first to leap to mind.

[FMArthur]

For reference, here is a generous depiction of what the Fighter would be if it were an arcane spellcaster.

{table=head]Level|BaseAttack[br]Bonus|Fort|Ref|Will|Special|0th[br]Level[br]Spells|1st[br]Level[br]Spells|2nd[br]Level[br]Spells|3rd[br]Level[br]Spells
1|+0 |+0|+0| +2| +1 Spell Known or feat|5|3
2|+1 |+0|+0| +3| +1 Spell Known or feat |6|3
3|+1 |+1|+1| +3| |6|4
4|+2 |+1|+1| +4| +1 Spell Known or feat |6|4
5|+2 |+1|+1| +4| |6|5
6|+3 |+2|+2| +5| +1 Spell Known or feat |6|5|3
7|+3 |+2|+2| +5| |6|6|3
8|+4 |+2|+2| +6| +1 Spell Known or feat |6|6|4
9|+4 |+3|+3| +6| |6|6|4
10|+5 |+3|+3| +7| +1 Spell Known or feat |6|6|5
11|+5 |+3|+3| +7| |6|6|5|3
12|+6/+1|+4|+4| +8| +1 Spell Known or feat |6|6|6|3
13|+6/+1|+4|+4| +8| |6|6|6|4
14|+7/+2|+4|+4| +9| +1 Spell Known or feat |6|6|6|4
15|+7/+2|+5|+5| +9| |6|6|6|5
16|+8/+3|+5|+5|+10| +1 Spell Known or feat |6|6|6|5
17|+8/+3|+5|+5|+10| |6|6|6|6
18|+9/+4|+6|+6|+11| +1 Spell Known or feat |6|6|6|6
19|+9/+4|+6|+6|+11| |6|6|6|6
20|+10/+5|+6|+6|+12|+1 Spell Known or feat |6|6|6|6[/table]

[b]Hit Die: d4
Skills: Craft, Decipher Script, Forgery, Heal, Knowledge (Arcana), Profession, Use Rope
Skill points: 2 + Int

Weapon and Armor Proficiency: This class is proficient with all robes and most books.
Spellcasting: This class casts spontaneously using Charisma, like a sorcerer would.
Spells Known or feats: At first level and every even-numbered level, this class can choose to learn a new spell from the Sorcerer/Wizard list of any level it can cast, or instead choose a metamagic feat to gain as a bonus feat.

Being less generous just means trimming off the last column of the chart entirely.

[Snowbluff]

A more helpful way is to par them down to the "specialist" spontaneous casters. So instead of wizards specializing in necromancy, you have Dread Necromancers. Instead of evokers, you have Warmages. Instead of... Well, you get the picture.


I'd suggest looking over these homebrew "tier 3" casters for ideas, too.

Summoner (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=181483)

Teleporter (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=168948)

Barrier Mage (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=177861)


Probably a few more floating around, too, but those were the first to leap to mind.

You also have to bring melee up to par with T3. Wildshape Ranger and ToB will do nicely.

[The-Mage-King]

You also have to bring melee up to par with T3. Wildshape Ranger and ToB will do nicely.

Which I assumed, given that the question was "what would you take away from a wizard to make a warblade a decent challenge". :smalltongue:

[sonofzeal]

The Adept is T4, but that might actually be over-generous. I'd say an Adept and a Fighter could be of about equivalent effectiveness up through lvl 12 - I've seen it happen, and it worked.

In point of fact it was a Cleric using the spellslots of an Adept, and a Dwarf Fighter4/BarbarianX with Weapon Spec: Waraxe. The Fighter was a lot tougher, with higher AC, and hit just as hard without Rage as the Cleric did even buffed up. The Cleric only pulled ahead by using Power Attack + Emerald Razor, which the Fighter could have done more effectively. The balance started shifting back towards the Cleric around lvl 12 or so.

Limiting a full-caster to Adept slots generally brings them down within reach of T4/T5 characters. Perhaps better sometimes, especially if using all the variants like Abrupt Jaunt and whatnot, but still generally within reach.

[INoKnowNames]

Got sent home from work a bit earlier today because of lack of customers... hate this economy.... Now then, where were we?


Take away this and you've done it

....

*opens mouth, then closes*

....

I'll be quite honest, I'm not sure if you're being serious or not, but either way, that's definitely not what I'm looking for. I don't want to eliminate magic from the setting entirely. Just weaken it enough to make it a decent and fair challenge on both sides.

If you were just doing a troll-post, and you might not be and I might just be missing genuine intent behind it, I request that you don't do so, please.


Remove bonus spells per day, bonus spell slots for being a specialist wizard, and change the duration of all negative debuff effects to 1 round on a failed save, ignored completely if a successful save. That way, a wizard can exchange one action for one round of an opponent's actions, and he has a lot fewer times per day to do it.

Completely ignoring an affect on a successful save, I like. I don't see why it's not like that period, actually. It's not much of a saving throw if you're still getting destroyed by it, even if it's just less so.

But I'm not completely sold on removing all of the bonus spells per day. I know that would be a good step in reducing how much the enemy could do, and maybe it's just because I haven't had much experience in the game, but I feel like I don't want to neuter them too badly, but don't want them at full power, either. It's that sweet spot that's hidden somewhere in the middle that I want to reach for.

I feel like this is a good time to make this clear, if it isn't so already: In terms of people, I would fit in rather well with #1 on this list (warning based on language and content goes here). (http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-types-people-who-always-give-terrible-advice_p2/)I feel like I have relatively decent intentions, but because I'm so new, a lot of what I see probably does stem from an incredible lack of experience. So keep that in mind as I post.


Additionally, change the duration of all spells with a duration other than instantaneous or permanent to one round. Make magic a very flashy, instantaneous effect. This almost completely negates the benefit of staple control spells like black tentacles and glitterdust, while keeping the value of blasting and other instantaneous effects. Summons are useful in a pinch but they are really just a waste of an action, and most buffs become entirely unhelpful.

Reducing the time of affects, a bit like reducing the number of spells, I'm not sure about going straight from 60-0 on. Definitely an idea, but it feels like it some such special affects should last at least a little longer than 6 seconds. It's still a consideration, though.


Suddenly, clerics are left to do not much but heal and wizards have few options save blasting and short term debuffs. Their magic is still potent, but it's not one spell ends the battle anymore.

Maybe it's just because of how I slept, but I'm not completely keen on this being the final result. Holy warriors would definitely need a reduction in power so they don't overshadow regular ones, but I think I'd like to keep the Cleric and other such divine spellcasters decently playable. I'm sliding towards the theme of the campaign being somewhat religious, with wizards and other spellcasters being an afront to the gods and to the foundation of the world.


Ban all metamagic feats. Every single one.

Remove the permanency spell from the game.

I like this.


Spells that resurrect the dead as undead, such as animate dead and create undead, now have a duration of 1 hour/level. Useful as minions, but not enough to build an army. Additionally, a caster can only control 1 HD of undead/caster level. Zombies are treated as having 1/2 their HD for the purposes of this limitation.

I like this, too. The final boss, possibly the strongest Wizard (at the time, and considering the setting limitations), should still be able to summon abominations to defend him, but won't be able to be absolutely terrifying with them. A bit of roleplaying in this as well, given that he could be, persay, using the bodies of various races for his twisted experiments into controling the vabric of the universe as his perverted mind wishes.


Immediate actions of all kinds are banned. No counters for ToB, no Abrupt Jaunt, no celerity. The sole exception to this ban is feather fall, which may still be cast at any time as a free action.

But I like those counters. ;.;

I suppose it would be fairer, considering how there are plenty of classes without the ability to use such actions.


You may not cast more than one spell per round, even if you would be able to do so. This limits the usefulness of swift action spells and the Quicken Spell feat, though they still have their uses.

While I absolutely love and agree with this idea, isn't Quicken Spell a Meta-Magic Feat?


Save DCs for all spells are capped at 20+spell level. This prevents a character from gaining too much benefit out of DC min/maxing, like Spell Focus/Greater Spell Focus/36 Int/Minor Esoterica (Illusion)/Shadow Weave Magic, etc.

I've heard of that phrase, but I've never really understood it. How do you min-max the difficulty checks for spells, exactly, if you don't mind me asking?


All illusion spells grant a saving throw to Disbelieve when they are first seen. If a creature fails his saving throw against this effect, he does not get another saving throw from seeing the effect, though he still gets a save if an ally points out its not real or if he interacts with it, as usual.

I was thinking that Sense Motive, Spot, or Listen could be used as well against such things like Illusion Spells, as well as against Invisibility and the like, or against Charm Affects. Autohypnosis or Concentration might find use here, too.


Charm person and charm monsters' effects are now instantaneous, and simply increase the affected creature's attitude towards the caster by 2 categories, to a maximum of helpful. Dominate person and dominate monster become 3rd and 6th level spells, respectively, and have their duration shortened to 1 round as per the rules stated above. They otherwise function as normal.

I feel like I would need to read up on the Dominate spells, if only because 6 seconds still seems a bit short. Otherwise, this sounds right, especially since I feel like about 6th level would be where I'd place the caps on what spells people could access.


The DC for a Concentration check to cast defensively is 40+spell level.

.... That seems a bit high... any particular reason why?


There, try that. That might help even the playing field a little bit.

This is a lot to consider and process. Thank you for the tips.


A more helpful way is to par them down to the "specialist" spontaneous casters. So instead of wizards specializing in necromancy, you have Dread Necromancers. Instead of evokers, you have Warmages. Instead of... Well, you get the picture.

I'd still like a nice evil general Wizard for the big bad evil guy, but I do like the idea of applying several lower levels of spell-casters to use instead of other Wizards, for the sake of minibosses.


I'd suggest looking over these homebrew "tier 3" casters for ideas, too.

Summoner (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=181483)

Teleporter (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=168948)

Barrier Mage (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=177861)


Probably a few more floating around, too, but those were the first to leap to mind.

Think there's a Homebrew for a Pyromaniac like Caster? I was talking with a friend who is Dming a game, and I recieved the idea that one of my bad guys will be a Yandere Pyromaniac. For all the fun that would bring.


For reference, here is a generous depiction of what the Fighter would be if it were an arcane spellcaster.

{table=head]Level|Base<br />Attack<br />Bonus|Fort|Ref|Will|Special|0th<br />Level<br />Spells|1st<br />Level<br />Spells|2nd<br />Level<br />Spells|3rd<br />Level<br />Spells
1|+0 |+0|+0| +2| +1 Spell Known or feat|5|3
2|+1 |+0|+0| +3| +1 Spell Known or feat |6|3
3|+1 |+1|+1| +3| |6|4
4|+2 |+1|+1| +4| +1 Spell Known or feat |6|4
5|+2 |+1|+1| +4| |6|5
6|+3 |+2|+2| +5| +1 Spell Known or feat |6|5|3
7|+3 |+2|+2| +5| |6|6|3
8|+4 |+2|+2| +6| +1 Spell Known or feat |6|6|4
9|+4 |+3|+3| +6| |6|6|4
10|+5 |+3|+3| +7| +1 Spell Known or feat |6|6|5
11|+5 |+3|+3| +7| |6|6|5|3
12|+6/+1|+4|+4| +8| +1 Spell Known or feat |6|6|6|3
13|+6/+1|+4|+4| +8| |6|6|6|4
14|+7/+2|+4|+4| +9| +1 Spell Known or feat |6|6|6|4
15|+7/+2|+5|+5| +9| |6|6|6|5
16|+8/+3|+5|+5|+10| +1 Spell Known or feat |6|6|6|5
17|+8/+3|+5|+5|+10| |6|6|6|6
18|+9/+4|+6|+6|+11| +1 Spell Known or feat |6|6|6|6
19|+9/+4|+6|+6|+11| |6|6|6|6
20|+10/+5|+6|+6|+12|+1 Spell Known or feat |6|6|6|6[/table]

Hit Die: d4
Skills: Craft, Decipher Script, Forgery, Heal, Knowledge (Arcana), Profession, Use Rope
Skill points: 2 + Int

Weapon and Armor Proficiency: This class is proficient with all robes and most books.
Spellcasting: This class casts spontaneously using Charisma, like a sorcerer would.
Spells Known or feats: At first level and every even-numbered level, this class can choose to learn a new spell from the Sorcerer/Wizard list of any level it can cast, or instead choose a metamagic feat to gain as a bonus feat.

Being less generous just means trimming off the last column of the chart entirely.

I feel like I don't completely understand this. Is the point suppost to be that this class is... well, horribly weak? Or am I missing something?


You also have to bring melee up to par with T3. Wildshape Ranger and ToB will do nicely.

I'm actually a bit torn on what I'd allow from Wild Shape, as well as other Transforming abilities. It's a bit of a touchy subject whether or not such types of characters and abilities would be seen as odd, or outright wrong, in this type of game... Making the final boss be able to turn into some type of giant monstrous form for his last desperate strategy is simply too good to pass up, but how to handle it properly....

And while I'd never consider not using Tome of Battle (seriously, I love that book), I feel like I can't just tell every low tier class to just pick up the matching Tome of Battle class. 'cause that's just wrong to do, from any standpoint. At least to me.

Maybe giving them access to the styles, if not finding ways to buff each type of class individually...


The Adept is T4, but that might actually be over-generous. I'd say an Adept and a Fighter could be of about equivalent effectiveness up through lvl 12 - I've seen it happen, and it worked.

In point of fact it was a Cleric using the spellslots of an Adept, and a Dwarf Fighter4/BarbarianX with Weapon Spec: Waraxe. The Fighter was a lot tougher, with higher AC, and hit just as hard without Rage as the Cleric did even buffed up. The Cleric only pulled ahead by using Power Attack + Emerald Razor, which the Fighter could have done more effectively. The balance started shifting back towards the Cleric around lvl 12 or so.

Limiting a full-caster to Adept slots generally brings them down within reach of T4/T5 characters. Perhaps better sometimes, especially if using all the variants like Abrupt Jaunt and whatnot, but still generally within reach.

I feel like, for the most part, I'd like them to be -JUST- a -teeny- -weiny- -itty- -bitty- bit stronger than an Adept. But not by much. In terms of spellcasting ability, I feel like I'd go with something more resembling the Bard Progression. Lowering the progression of them to those of either the Bard or Adept still seems like a swell idea, though.

[Lonely Tylenol]

About fifteen levels.

[Ziegander]

I feel like I don't completely understand this. Is the point suppost to be that this class is... well, horribly weak? Or am I missing something?

Not to put words in his mouth, but the points FMArthur was making were a) Fighters are a very weak class, and b) Fighter feats give them no capabilities whatsoever that can't be emulated or completely outclassed by 1st, 2nd, or 3rd level spells.

In some ways, I think he was being generous with that class. In other ways, I think he was being a bit too stingy. To be fair, though, that class, as horribly weak as it is, is probably stronger than a Fighter in many, many ways.

[ericgrau]

If you know enough mundane tricks and magic items a warrior can hold up to most core spells. If you don't, he can handle a lot less of these spells. Either way, you remove the remaining spells that cause status effects that he can't handle. That's about it, simple.

But I wouldn't actually do this at all, because D&D is not PvP it's player vs. monster. Having a greater variety of spells that each apply to different monsters makes for more interesting encounters. Stay away from spells that almost always, rather than partially, dominate like shivering touch and you'll be fine.

If anything you might add in a slightly slowed caster progression that doesn't kick in until at least level 6. Because warriors and magicians are way too different to be compared, there isn't much of a balance issue to worry about as long as you don't nerf the magician so hard that he's painful to play. Rather one is good at one type of thing and another is good at another type of thing and you work together against varying opponents without dueling. Even damage spells don't need adjusting to make up for slowed progression since most are multi-target damage, which while useful less often, still remains useful compared to single target warrior damage when there are enough foes.

[Ziegander]

But I wouldn't actually do this at all, because D&D is not PvP it's player vs. monster.

[...]

Rather one is good at one type of thing and another is good at another type of thing and you work together against varying opponents without dueling.

Except that you're forgetting that his campaign is specifically about Warriors vs Magicians. It may not be player vs player, but it is going to be Warrior PCs vs Mage NPCs. So, it's a pretty radically different game than "standard D&D" is supposed to be. Parts of D&D are designed with the philosophy that the players will lose without a Wizard and/or Cleric. Those parts of D&D simply cannot work correctly without some pretty significant changes made for his campaign.

[sonofzeal]

I feel like, for the most part, I'd like them to be -JUST- a -teeny- -weiny- -itty- -bitty- bit stronger than an Adept. But not by much. In terms of spellcasting ability, I feel like I'd go with something more resembling the Bard Progression. Lowering the progression of them to those of either the Bard or Adept still seems like a swell idea, though.
Well, they had the Adept spell slots, but the chassis of a Cleric (d8 hd, heavy armor, better saves, awesome spell list). Seemed to work.

Going with Bard spell slots might be better though, yeah.

Also, check out my "Minimum Intervention Balance Fix" in my sig; it's a way to make spellcasters still potentially just as scary, but with limitations that can be exploited. Beating a powerful Cleric with this fix would involve a bit of care to jump through hoops and prevent them from getting Sanction... with the possibility that the final boss can somehow have Sanction anyway for a real "oh fuuuuu-" moment. That's how movies/game always work, isn't it? It isn't a proper climactic fight if everything's going according to the hero's plan.

[Flickerdart]

One of the strengths of SoD/L/S spells is that their target is removed from the encounter by failing a single save. Modifying debuff spells to be more like Hold Person (save every round) or Time Hop (ability check every round) makes them far less ridiculous, and neatly eliminates the "mages go -> melee cleans up" encounter structure.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

The biggest things that magic does over melee:

1) Breaking the action economy
2) Being able to nova regularly
3) Being able to target multiple defenses, or not needing to target a defense

Take, for example, a level 5 Wizard with Grease, Glitterdust, and Stinking Cloud. He can target any of the three saves with a Save or Lose effect, he can hit multiple opponents with each of them for persistent effects that frees him up to do more bad things following rounds.

Also look at spells which don't allow saves, like Enervation. It's effectively a 'you suck, you suck more, you're gone' type spell.

This gets exponentially worse when they start breaking the action economy. Twin spell, Split ray, Repeat Spell, Ocular Spell... that's to say nothing of Quicken + Imbue Familiar shennanigans, or Time Stop.

Most of these require metamagic reduction tricks, which are also widely available.

Basically, even if you have two characters who are essentially equal, giving one of them six actions each turn gives him a distinct advantage.

Now bring into this spells like Rope Trick or MMM, that lets a Wizard reset his entire spell list pretty much at will. This lets them nova their most powerful spells and still be able to hit a reset button.

These are the traits that make any caster inherently superior to any pure melee.

Barbarians can do over 1k damage a swing. That's nasty, sure. A wizard, however, can shut down an entire group with a single spell, simply by stacking DC bonuses and tossing out a SoL spell. He can then proceed to buff the party so that they are all nigh invulnerable, including a lot of utility stuff like Teleports and Flight. He's a 'do anything you want and get away with it' class.

Barbarians... just hit things hard. Sure, that's nasty if you get hit, but it's also fairly easy to avoid... don't get into melee. You can't do that with a caster.

So if you are wanting to take casters down a few pegs, all of these will need to be addressed.

[Doorhandle]

I think simply removing All-day buffs, metamagic allowing them, congiencsy, distance, and the wizard's initiative modifier would do.

Wizards will generally have a decent con, but even that won’t help them against decently built ubercharger or TWF rouge if they can’t get defensive wards up in time, and no all-day buffs means they can’t set them up in advance.

Might still be iffy though. On the off chance such a munchkin didn’t kill the barstard within 6 seconds the counterattack would really hurt.

edit: Also, I would like to point out this is what it takes for a fighting-type to WIN, not necessarily to be BALANCED against them.

[candycorn]

I'd go with:

Spells with a cast time of 1 round or less and a duration of more than 2 rounds can be cast as a standard action, and have a duration of 2 rounds.
Spells with a cast time of 1 round or less can be cast as a 1 round cast time, and have normal duration.
Metamagic, in addition to increasing the slot of a spell, increases the cast time by 100% per spell slot increase. This is true even when effects are used that normally apply metamagic without cast time increase.
Casting defensively is not allowed.
Metamagic costs may not be reduced in any way.
Specialist wizards receive +1 Caster level to specialist schools, and -2 caster level to all other schools, in addition to banned schools.

So, if you wanted to Extend a Mage Armor, you would start with a 1 round cast time (you want hours/level, not 2 round). You'd then increase it to a level 2 spell, increase the cast time to 2 rounds, and there you have it.

You get limited use out of tactical standard action spells, but for full power, you have to take risks in combat. Metamagic is hard to apply in combat. Oddly, this gives more flexibility to summons, which can be cast as a standard action for 2 round summons. It eliminates DMM, since cost reduction of metamagic isn't possible. It eliminates Quicken spell. It reduces the tactical ability of a wizard by a large amount. Wizards can still be terribly effective, but they become more vulnerable as well.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Actually... I did come up with some ideas when I was working over at the d20r project...

Ahh, here it is:


Okay, as we all know, the main problem with Arcane Magic in 3.5 is that it has too many 'Win' buttons, and can break the action economy too easily. I propose we go back a couple of editions to help limit these problems.

This is designed specifically to plug into and work with the Wizard, or any other class which explicitly casts magic to limit how powerful it can be.

1) Magic Is Slow - In AD&D, it took TIME to cast magic. During which time it could easily be interrupted.

So how about this: When you begin casting a spell, you declare any and all variables (I cast a Fireball at this area), and it finishes and produces an effect at initiative (your initiative - spell level). Therefore, if you are on Initiative 15, and you cast a Fireball at a group of Goblins, the spell itself doesn't go off until Initiative 12. If the goblins move on Initiative 13, they could well end up scattering before the fireball lands.

This turns Initiative into something like 'impulses', but it makes it a lot easier to interrupt a spell.

As a corollary to this: Magic normally takes a full-round action to cast, rather than a standard action. This limits their mobility and their ability to flit around the battlefield tossing around Win Buttons.

Now then, Swift action spells (such as Feather Fall) are exempt from this, which makes them very useful, if rare. However, this means we need to strongly look at Quicken Spell (although if you can't reduce metamagic, then it's not so much of a problem, since it's a +4 adjustment).

2) Magic Isn't Easy - Again, in earlier editions, if a wizard got hit while he was casting a spell... it went poof. No save, no concentration check... goodbye. While I don't want to be quite that cruel, wizards do have far too easy a time of casting spells in melee without worrying about getting hurt.

First off, remove Casting on the Defensive. The Concentration check is just too easy to pull off. So any time a wizard casts a spell, he provokes AoO.

Second, if he gets hit by a non-damaging effect which negates his ability to cast (for example, if he failed his saving throw against a Stinking Cloud while he was in the middle of casting, which inflicts the Nauseated condition that prevents full-round actions), he automatically loses the spell slot, as though it had been cast, but to no effect. If he is affected by a non-damaging effect which does not negate his ability to cast (Ray of Enfeeblement), he has to make a Concentration check (DC 10+spell level+casting mod of opponent caster) or lose the spell. If he takes damage while casting the spell, he has to make a Concentration check DC 10+ damage taken or lose the spell. If he successfully saves and takes no effect from an effect (for example, if he made his Fort save against Stinking Cloud), and it has no secondary effects, then his spellcasting is not affected.

Third off, spells with no Somatic components do not provoke AoO when cast in melee. This makes Still Spell very valuable, and I find that a +1 SL adjustment is a fitting price to pay for making it safer to cast in melee. We may need to remove somatic components from touch spells, though, to prevent nerfing them entirely. On the other hand, touch spells can be kept charged, so the wizard can cast it on one turn, then step in and release it on the next, so maybe not.

Also, completely and totally remove any and all ability to mitigate or negate the spell level adjustment from metamagic feats and abilities which mimic them.

Thoughts? Suggestions? Feedback?

[kme]

The fact that all mages will be controlled by you and only you, means that you don't have to make any changes at all. Any kind of fix would be kinda pointless, as you can achieve the same thing by just making suboptimal builds.

Just make sure that you don't use spells/tactics that would be too strong for your group.


If you still want to apply some quick fix overall. You can limit the save DCs by removing mental ability items from the game and maybe adding save DCs to be modified by wisdom for arcane casters and charisma for divine (making them more MAD).
Battlefield control and buffs will still be there but they usually don't disrupt fun. Just be on a lookout for some no save spells and combos.

[Flickerdart]

You could also use psionics instead of magic - with the exception of a few stinkers (mostly action economy breakers) psionics are far more balanced, insidious (mind flayers are psionic, after all) and easier to build (a 20th level Wilder only knows 11 powers, a 20th level Psion only 40 - while a Wizard of that level gets more spells than that for free, before even scribing anything).

[Novawurmson]

You could also use psionics instead of magic - with the exception of a few stinkers (mostly action economy breakers) psionics are far more balanced, insidious (mind flayers are psionic, after all) and easier to build (a 20th level Wilder only knows 11 powers, a 20th level Psion only 40 - while a Wizard of that level gets more spells than that for free, before even scribing anything).

Plus the limited number of psionic powers available makes it easier to pick out the problem ones.

I think cutting all spells level 7-9 from the game is a nice start. Going off of what FMArthur was implying (I think), level 3 spells are world breaking? Create Food and Water? Fly? Invisibility? Those are the sort of things people would ask for if a Genie gave them three wishes, not middling magic for low-level casters to putter around with.

[NeoSeraphi]

Pyromaniac (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=225459)

Pyromaniac Feats (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=231700)

Pyro caster base class (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=158205)

Mage of the Fiery Heart (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=12576082#post12576082)

[KoboldCleric]

How much would you need to take away to make a Magician beatable by a Warrior?

This is an easy one, Magic.

Trust me, I know Ian, and he would definitely be beaten by a warrior.

[Seerow]

The DC for a Concentration check to cast defensively is 40+spell level.


That sets the base DC too high, and doesn't have it scale enough.


I'd set it at more like DC20+spell level^2


So:

1st-21
2nd-24
3rd-29
4th-36
5th-45
6th-56
7th-69
8th-84
9th-101

[sonofzeal]

That sets the base DC too high, and doesn't have it scale enough.


I'd set it at more like DC20+spell level^2


So:

1st-21
2nd-24
3rd-29
4th-36
5th-45
6th-56
7th-69
8th-84
9th-101
Even that's too high. DC 15 + spell level * 3 should be suffiicent.

1st-18
2nd-21
3rd-24
4th-27
5th-30
6th-33
7th-36
8th-39
9th-42

At least this way your average wizard has a chance of making it. Remember, if you fail the check the spell is BLOWN. You'd have to be really desperate to even attempt without a good chance of success.

[Flickerdart]

That goes up way too high - making a DC101 check at 17 is practically impossible - with 20 ranks, a +30 custom item, and a +10 ability score bonus, you still need to roll a 41 to succeed.

[NeoSeraphi]

At least this way your average wizard has a chance of making it. Remember, if you fail the check the spell is BLOWN. You'd have to be really desperate to even attempt without a good chance of success.

Sounds like a good deal to me. Then melee can actually stand a chance of fighting a wizard rather than having the wizard defensively dimension door away before raining death on them.

[Seerow]

That goes up way too high - making a DC101 check at 17 is practically impossible - with 20 ranks, a +30 custom item, and a +10 ability score bonus, you still need to roll a 41 to succeed.

I'm okay with 9th level spells being basically impossible to succeed on casting defensively with.


Mundanes get shafted with DC80+ to do nice things, why should casters get off with DC 30 or even 40 to avoid melee?

[deuxhero]

Honestly, I think that even if you do remove the spells ability, a Warrior could still lose if you optimize right, it is an NPC class that is the only thing CW Samurai is better than.

As for caster types vs martial types rather than the specific classes, huge limits to the spell list (Adept, Warmage) is parity with a thought out fighter and slightly less limiting limits (Dread Necro, Beguiler) are on par with the ToB trio and Wildshape Ranger.

[Ziegander]

Honestly, I think that even if you do remove the spells ability, a Warrior could still lose if you optimize right, it is an NPC class that is the only thing CW Samurai is better than.

Your sarcasm it... isn't written in blue.

You do know he's not talking about the Warrior NPC class and is using the term warrior loosely to mean any non-magical fighting-type, right? He says so up front before anything else in the OP...

[deuxhero]

I know, I edited in an actual response before you posted (but after last refresh)

[erikun]

INoKnowNames, could you please fix that quote you made in your post? It is stretching out my screen to an unreasonable length; I'm not going to keep scrolling back and forth just to read through the thread.

[busterswd]

Easy answer? Don't optimize the wizards. Go for blastery wizards without impenetrable defenses. Go for wizards that don't have a contingency for every tragedy, don't have a way of flying 24/7, don't buff themselves every morning in the safety on their impenetrable dimension, etc. Have them be incredibly cocky and convinced from years of experience that they're untouchable.

Their mindset: they can pretty much rain fire, lightning, and death upon those stick wielding imbeciles with a thought. You wouldn't bother spraying around the bottom of your bed with Raid every morning to protect yourself from ants, and even if you did, after a while, it would get tiresome; the ants aren't going to do much to you.

[Flickerdart]

I'm okay with 9th level spells being basically impossible to succeed on casting defensively with.


Mundanes get shafted with DC80+ to do nice things, why should casters get off with DC 30 or even 40 to avoid melee?
The obvious answer is to make the mundane DCs lower, or simply saying "no you can't cast defensively" rather than putting up a DC that's all but impossible to make until well into Epic.

[Seerow]

The obvious answer is to make the mundane DCs lower, or simply saying "no you can't cast defensively" rather than putting up a DC that's all but impossible to make until well into Epic.

Why? Why not make it impossibly hard to cast higher level spells defensively? This makes it so when a caster gets cornered by a melee, he gets forced into using lower level spells, rather than just carrying on as if there's nobody next to him at all. This makes features that keep you from provoking without a check more valuable, and makes skill optimization a practical potentially useful tool for the caster, possibly even one worth dropping a caster level or two for. After all, +100 skill checks are more than possible, they just typically require a little more optimization than 'grab a +30 skill item'.

[gomipile]

To make it easier, you could just use E6.

[Ziegander]

To make it easier, you could just use E6.

Actually, this is probably the best suggestion thus far. Things can still get a little wonky, but a lot less so if you use Gnorman's E6 Compendium (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=215986). Don't worry, it's a lot of homebrew, but it's well-balanced and all of the combat classes (as well as one of the skilled classes) have archetypes that use Tome of Battle.

[INoKnowNames]

I spent a good two hours or so trying to figure out why I couldn't respond to as many thing as I wanted. Then I realised it automatically selects 10 quotes, and no more. I'll respond to anything I missed later today.

One other thing I may not have mentioned: except for the Wizard, and maybe other classes that opperate similarly to it, I was not going to ban Spell Casting from the party, persay. Considering that Sorcerer Magic is inborn, Bardic Magic is concieved by performance, and Divine Magic comes from Gods, the Wizard is the only one that seems like an outlier, as well as the most likely to be bad. No one else gains their power from trying to control the fabric of existance...

To me, it'd be like being the Chaotic Evil guy in a party full of Paladins. It would be interesting to see how a Sorcerer might roleplay, although I should consider options to add for them other than spells to get through the campaign (unless maybe a jail visit and breakout would make a decent plot point through the story). I'm not completely sold on the Bard yet, and (other than maybe beating the Cleric with a slight nerf stick), I've little need to touch Divine Spellcasters in this type of story.

Also, and I highly doubt the type of person I'm mentioning would see this, but I hate people that post somewhat sarcastic comments that have absolutely no value. Being told that this is a very odd concept that would require quite a bit of additional work beyond learning how to Dm for the very first time is one thing (and a very good reason to boot), but essentially being told "lol mages no lose to sword guys" with nothing else backing it up is kind of annoying, to the point where I wonder if I could report such posts in the future. I'll go ahead and admit that I might just be over reacting (and of the 3 example posts that prompted this line of thinking, one appears to actually be quite serious, and provided additional information supporting this, which is why I'm not ranting and raving about it). But still, please don't just post an odd comment without explaining it. At least here.

Substituting Psionics for traditional spellcasting is an interesting choice... people capable of dirrectly using their minds to modify the world might be as dangerous as those that have memorized the manual for it... a possible quest involving the destruction of the sources of each school of magic and attacks on the gods might be cool (if a bit grandiose).

As for difficulty checks to cast defensively, I say that the DC should require optimization from the caster to ensure they couldn't just do it from a lucky roll without at least some effort on their part, but it shouldn't be such that it's sorta kinda physically impossible to do. I'm still trying to figure out how some of the skill check difficulties can even be reached. I think there's one for balance involving a DC 100 to stand on clouds!?!

I'd like to say that I wanted to stick to 3.5, if only because I really really like 3.5 Plus, all of the books that I have (and seriously, my uncle's library may as well be a dungeon for all of the things he has there, not mentioning the random D&D book collection) are primarally 3.5. That said, if everyone thinks it would be easier to switch over to E6 for this type of game, I suppose I'm down with that.

Sorry about my other quote. Hopefully the thread's not being stretched out as badly now.

NeoSaraphi, those Pyromaniac Feats are sexy. If it wasn't for the character in mind not really being a Cha type (although then again, you never know with a Yandere), I'd have stated a character with that featline already.

Lots of amazing ideas from most everyone so far. Lots of good ideas I'd use in any game, actually. Thank you. Should I modify the first post to try to include a running list of what I'm considering so far, to make sure everything's compatable with eachother?

[Ziegander]

I'd like to say that I wanted to stick to 3.5, if only because I really really like 3.5 Plus, all of the books that I have (and seriously, my uncle's library may as well be a dungeon for all of the things he has there, not mentioning the random D&D book collection) are primarally 3.5. That said, if everyone thinks it would be easier to switch over to E6 for this type of game, I suppose I'm down with that.

Nice things about E6 for you:

1) E6 is 3.5, so you don't have to learn a new game. It's a modification to the standard way that 3.5 is run, but it's not a completely different rules set.

2) E6 only goes up to 6th level, which is nice because it keeps the game in an easy to digest, easy to manage format that is forgiving and kind to new DMs.

3) E6 helps keep the balance of power (especially Gnorman's Compendium) between spellcasters and non-casters solidly in check since non-casters are typically strongest in the first 5 levels of D&D and spellcasters typically don't get the ability to destroy worlds until the last 13 levels of D&D.

I really would recommend playing an E6 game. I think you'll have more enjoyment out of your stated campaign idea with it, it will be easier for you to manage, and you won't really have to tweak anything to make it run properly. It's tried and tested and it's enjoyed by many gamers.

[Tyndmyr]

And please note I use those terms very loosely.

I'm also aware of how controversial and flame-bait ridden this view can be.

I'm certainly not going to be able to do it now, nor will I be able to do it later. It'll probably be months from now that I can consider it, simply because of my own inexperience, since such a project would require quite a bit of planning, and I've yet to finish any of my first games.

However, I would like to try my hand at being a Dungeon Master. And one of the first ideas for a story that popped up would be the normal people vs. the spell casters. That the way of the Sword and Fist was being threatened by a recent surge in Magic, and to maintain their way of life, that warriors from all sorts of backgrounds would need to work together to defeat the combined threat. I'm not sure how divine magic might be handled, but so far, I'm thinking outright Magic vs. Mundane*.

I have played in/DMed(round robin) such a campaign, and this was handled mostly by RAW in 3.5.

First off, the idea of complete balance was not really considered. The mundane types were stamping out the "evils" of magic, and had no compunctions about fair fights. Taking dozens to kill a single mage was not unusual.

Secondly, they were not entirely berefit of magic themselves. They had a (very few) captive mages, whom had been convinced/brainwashed/tortured into believing that their powers truly were evil, and who were forced to serve the crusade before being put to death. This was a fairly dark campaign, and neither side was really anything describable as good from a modern perspective, so all manner of horrible things happened along the way.

Thirdly, not every wizard in this world was optimized. Sure, *I* was playing a Iot7v/Incantatrix, but for every wizard that has levels and optimization, there's a lot without them. Fleeing and hiding were things many casters engaged in. In addition, casters were not a particularly unified force early on(in fact, the party had been previously hired to shatter the mages guild in a variety of creative ways), which provided the mundanes with a notable advantage.

It's a way to portray what you're going for without having to...basically rewrite the entire system. Setting matters...a lot.

[INoKnowNames]

Nice things about E6 for you:

1) E6 is 3.5, so you don't have to learn a new game. It's a modification to the standard way that 3.5 is run, but it's not a completely different rules set.

2) E6 only goes up to 6th level, which is nice because it keeps the game in an easy to digest, easy to manage format that is forgiving and kind to new DMs.

3) E6 helps keep the balance of power (especially Gnorman's Compendium) between spellcasters and non-casters solidly in check since non-casters are typically strongest in the first 5 levels of D&D and spellcasters typically don't get the ability to destroy worlds until the last 13 levels of D&D.

I really would recommend playing an E6 game. I think you'll have more enjoyment out of your stated campaign idea with it, it will be easier for you to manage, and you won't really have to tweak anything to make it run properly. It's tried and tested and it's enjoyed by many gamers.

If you're so willing to recommend it that much, I suppose I've nothing to lose from giving it a read at least.


I have played in/DMed(round robin) such a campaign, and this was handled mostly by RAW in 3.5.

First off, the idea of complete balance was not really considered. The mundane types were stamping out the "evils" of magic, and had no compunctions about fair fights. Taking dozens to kill a single mage was not unusual.

Secondly, they were not entirely berefit of magic themselves. They had a (very few) captive mages, whom had been convinced/brainwashed/tortured into believing that their powers truly were evil, and who were forced to serve the crusade before being put to death. This was a fairly dark campaign, and neither side was really anything describable as good from a modern perspective, so all manner of horrible things happened along the way.

Thirdly, not every wizard in this world was optimized. Sure, *I* was playing a Iot7v/Incantatrix, but for every wizard that has levels and optimization, there's a lot without them. Fleeing and hiding were things many casters engaged in. In addition, casters were not a particularly unified force early on(in fact, the party had been previously hired to shatter the mages guild in a variety of creative ways), which provided the mundanes with a notable advantage.

It's a way to portray what you're going for without having to...basically rewrite the entire system. Setting matters...a lot.

I'm sure that I have a few comments towards this, but the one thing that springs to mind right now is that I'm not sure if I can properly play that... dark. It's something I need to work on.

[Telonius]

There was a really old thread about this (link (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/archive/index.php?t-111843.html)). The opponent was a level-20 wizard, with the party being only melee, but it had a pretty good discussion of exactly what you needed to be able to negate (whether or not the game will actually let you negate it) in order to pose any kind of a serious threat to a very intelligently-played Wizard.

I think the person that more or less summed it up was Afroakuma:


Without Contingency, all(yes, all) you need to do is hit him in the surprise round, win initiative, and stop him from taking any immediate actions to cast. Then you need to penetrate his illusions, his Abjurations, and his new shapes defenses(free action). And then disable him in some way, shape, or form that prevents spellcasting. All without triggering any of his personal defenses. Have fun.

Exactly. So let's break this down.

You need:

• Some ability to bypass contingencies
• To go first
• To get through his defenses
• To deal with shapechange
• To stop him from getting out when all that has been accomplished.

[Tyndmyr]

I'm sure that I have a few comments towards this, but the one thing that springs to mind right now is that I'm not sure if I can properly play that... dark. It's something I need to work on.

I'm not sure that the level of darkness we played at was essential...we literally had things like the mages forcing people to become constructs and such...both sides were remarkably evil by any standards, but there's going to be a certain amount of messiness when you have a large scale war like all magic vs all mundanes. Now, you could cast one side as unambiguously good, or even try for a conflicting ideologies, both of which mean well, but in most typical D&D universes, there's things, such as mental domination spells, that are useful, but aren't exactly nice.

Definitely worth considering how you wish to approach the use of such things, even aside from balance considerations.

Edit: Note that a lot of wizard options come down to some form of hiding or running away. Teleportation, for instance, is fantastic for getting out of a fight going badly. It is...somewhat less effective in a populous world where literally everyone is in a magic vs mundane war. You can retreat to a hopefully empty area in the wilds(and pray hard that no random encounters happen to be there), but going to another populated city results in you blatantly announcing what you are on arrival.

Miss chances are likewise, based on some form of hiding. Leaving aside the things that actually negate that, pure quantity of guys trying to kill you can overcome such defenses. Mirror image falls remarkably quickly against even a squad of low level archers, for instance. With the exception of hp, their resources are not limited. Yours are. It can be delightfully challenging, even as a fairly decently optimized caster.

Sure, you've got the folks with a private demiplane...yeah. That's limited to sorcs, wizards and creation domain casters capable of casting 9th level spells, happen to know that specific spell, and have enough additional xp and such to cast it. Also, since there's a one week casting time, you'd better have all that BEFORE the war. The number of casters who have this are...minimal. Dangerous, yes, but very, very few in number.