Random idea on balancing spellcasters

[molten_dragon]

I was looking at some flaws from Dragon Magazine earlier today and saw one that doubles the casting time of all spells. I was thinking about how much more severe that was than a lot of other flaws, and then started thinking that maybe that could be used as a balancing factor to tone down the power of spellcasters.

Essentially, what if every spell required at least a full-round action to cast, and there were no ways of shortening the time lower than a full-round action? Would it help even things out between casters and non-casters?

Casting a spell would involve more of a tradeoff, since it would tie you up for a whole round. Casters would also be vulnerable the whole time, and casting on the defensive would no longer work, giving non-casters more of an opportunity to disrupt the spell.

Does it go too far, not enough?

[JaronK]

Well, a major issue is that some of the most powerful spell effects are ones that help you in the long term, not the short term. Things like Animate Dead, Animate Dread Warrior, Awaken Undead, and so on. Or Fabricate, Wall of Iron, Wall of Stone, and the varied silly uses for that sort of thing. Or even just long term buffs like Chained Greater Magic Weapon and Polymorph Any Object. So while it would hurt casters who do what casters were intended to do (heal allies, launch fireballs, etc) it would have little effect on casters who are dishing out serious power.

I mean, when I look at the current caster I'm playing, this nerf would have stopped me from casting Spiritual Weapon to whack enemies for a small amount of damage... but would have no effect on the two Skeletal Dire Bears that do the primary damage for me.

JaronK

[BowStreetRunner]

It would certainly depend on the spell. For instance, casting a 24 hour buff would not suffer much.

[Eldan]

A bit, maybe, and mostly at early levels. At higher levels, wizards really depend more on layered buffs than on running away for defence.

[TuggyNE]

Shapechange would be unaffected, for example. Also, feather fall and a few others would no longer make any sense.

[Flickerdart]

I was looking at some flaws from Dragon Magazine earlier today and saw one that doubles the casting time of all spells. I was thinking about how much more severe that was than a lot of other flaws, and then started thinking that maybe that could be used as a balancing factor to tone down the power of spellcasters.

Essentially, what if every spell required at least a full-round action to cast, and there were no ways of shortening the time lower than a full-round action? Would it help even things out between casters and non-casters?

Casting a spell would involve more of a tradeoff, since it would tie you up for a whole round. Casters would also be vulnerable the whole time, and casting on the defensive would no longer work, giving non-casters more of an opportunity to disrupt the spell.

Does it go too far, not enough?
The problem with spellcasting is that a relatively small number of spells are really freakin' good. If you make it so a caster can only cast half as many spells, you are practically forcing them to pick those really freakin' good spells if they want to contribute. Making more people want to use the broken spells is not what a spellcasting fix should do.