PDA

View Full Version : no fighter = no damage, and others



limejuicepowder
2013-03-07, 04:17 PM
I have two completely unrelated rules I'd like to get some opinions on.

1) Banning all direct-damage and creature-summon spells.

Before someone points out that a good caster isn't going to waste spell slots for damage anyways, I want to justify myself. As it stands, perhaps the main problem between casters and mundanes is that spells are so good that once a caster is in no real danger of running out of slots, there is virtually no situation where it is better to have a mundane instead of a caster. But if casters were unable to do damage, mundanes would at least still have their place: at some point in most fights, hit points are going to need getting rid of.

Casters will still have save or die spells, which means they won't be totally incapable of killing when solo, but they just won't be stepping on the toes (or lives) of mundanes so much.

2) This is totally unrelated to the above, but the other day I was thinking of an alternate leveling system where the character's total level determines what abilities they gain, including multiclassing. For an example, if a 1st level fighter gains a level and multiclasses to barb, he would gain 4+int skills, +1 fort save, d12 hp, and uncanny dodge. If he then took a level of wizard, he would gain 2+int skills, +1 fort and ref, a 2nd level spell slot, and 2 spells known.

Prestige classes would need some looking at, as the first 5 or more levels would be impossible to take. Maybe add 5 to the level of each prestige class, so the 1st level abilities may be gained when taking the 6th character level. Alternatively, erase all prereqs and allow access to prestige from level 1 (this would be entirely insane however).

How much would this change the game, and what kind of builds would become possible - and impossible? With this system, you can no longer dip in other classes to gain low-level abilities; if you some classes' 3rd level ability, that has to be the class you take at 3rd level (or you need to wait for a higher level when the class gets an improvement on that ability).

RFLS
2013-03-07, 04:23 PM
The first suggestion is addressing a non-issue; mages aren't powerful because they can cast fireball, they're powerful because they don't need to care about damage at all.

The second one is a terrible, terrible idea, and you should never do it. You'd end up with builds composed of mage dips, where characters never run out of spells and don't suffer for multiclassing. It actively punishes melee, because a lot of melee builds rely on picking up abilities from the first few levels of a new class.

Gnaeus
2013-03-07, 04:26 PM
I have two completely unrelated rules I'd like to get some opinions on.

1) Banning all direct-damage and creature-summon spells.

Before someone points out that a good caster isn't going to waste spell slots for damage anyways, I want to justify myself. As it stands, perhaps the main problem between casters and mundanes is that spells are so good that once a caster is in no real danger of running out of slots, there is virtually no situation where it is better to have a mundane instead of a caster. But if casters were unable to do damage, mundanes would at least still have their place: at some point in most fights, hit points are going to need getting rid of.

Casters will still have save or die spells, which means they won't be totally incapable of killing when solo, but they just won't be stepping on the toes (or lives) of mundanes so much.

Generally, your caster spends less time stepping on his allies' toes when he casts lightning bolt (10d6 avg 35 damage, less than a level 10 fighter can do) than when he casts a save or lose which ends the combat. If anything, most DM's want to discourage the save or loses, not the direct damage spells. If you take away the DD spells, they will be replaced by other attack spells.

If I am a caster, and I WANT to take over the role of the melee for some reason, I'm not going to do it with damage spells, unless I am a very specialized damage build like mailman. I will do it with buffs, like:
Wizard + Polymorph + Persist Wraithstrike
Druid + Bite of the Were X (shared with pet)
Cleric + Dmm Persist Divine Power + DMM persist Righteous might.

All of those guys easily outfighter the fighter, even if they never cast a damage spell or a summon.

limejuicepowder
2013-03-07, 04:39 PM
The second one is a terrible, terrible idea, and you should never do it. You'd end up with builds composed of mage dips, where characters never run out of spells and don't suffer for multiclassing. It actively punishes melee, because a lot of melee builds rely on picking up abilities from the first few levels of a new class.

How would characters have endless slots? At most they'd have the same number of slots; if they started as a caster, stayed within that same class, and only deviated to take PrC's with +1 caster level.

With this, a character could be melee for 6 levels, dip wizard and instantly have access to 4th level spells - though they'd have very limited spell slots, and only 2 spells known.

Admittedly, it probably would hurt characters trying to stay entirely mundane (though maybe not - selectively dropping in to certain classes and getting the best stuff, while skipping the other junk, would be nice. Dungeoncrasher fighter 6 with only 1 fighter level? Yes please). It would also be a gish's dream.

Glimbur
2013-03-07, 04:53 PM
Take a level of wizard. Now take a level of psion. Now take a level of archivist. Throw in Factotum to taste. Take a level of Wu Jen. Without your rule #2, this gets 1st level spells (arcane and divine) and powers. With rule 2, depending on when things get taken you get... significantly more. And that's staying SAD on Intelligence, if you throw in a second stat (Wis or Cha) you can get a lot more casting.