(Bad and worse) Consequences for being a caster?

[Balor01]

"Magic should have the potential to be extremely powerful, but also extremely dangerous."

This is a statement I really like when it comes to full casters. Or casters in general in 3.5

What I would like from playground is a few suggestions on how to make magic ever more dangerous - to its user, to everyone else? It is not so much idea of a nerf as is an idea of bigger, badder things coming with stronger spellcasting.

What are some good ways to do that? Chances of insanity beoynd INT 16? Unvoluntary summoning of hostile outsiders? Magical diseases?

I'm pretty sure that someone somewhere did some good homebrew on this.

thanks, playground


Full caster fanboys need not apply(and cry)

[Khedrac]

It's an interesting idea, but you will need to think long and hard about game balance.

What do I mean? - well when was the last time you saw anyone play a character with a non-0 Arcane Spell Failure Chance? I am not sure I ever have; generally the chance of a big spell going wrong and the worst possible time means players prefer to have casters wear less AC than risk ASF.

With this mind-set most players simply won't play a caster with a serious risk on casting spells.

In some ways this is very odd, as a lot of players will happily have their characters drink from magical fountains or draw cards from wierd magical decks of cards. However, these are short duration risk v. reward - the chance of a spell causing X to happen is pretty much guaranteed to occur eventually.

So with this is mind it looks like an intersting idea - and possibly a good way to make most casters NPCs without telling the players "no casters".
But be prepared for no magical healing if it effects those casters too, no AoE spells and things like that.

[Sgt. Cookie]

You could use the Sanity rules on the SRD.

[Jeff the Green]

Look at how the binder (ToM) does it. Basically, you bind "vestiges" of powerful creatures to your soul, letting them hitchhike around for a while. They give you powers, but if you don't succeed on a Charisma check they also force you to do certain things. If you don't, they punish you by imposing a -1 penalty on most roll that increases by 1 each time you don't follow their wishes.

[AntiTrust]

The dresden files has an interesting take on mind magic in that even simple enchantments can really hurt a persons psyche, a look at that series's take on it could make the enchantment school have some interesting consequences

[ArcturusV]

Momentum systems. I've kinda toyed around with it a bit. I haven't applied it to DnD but it's worked for a few other games.

The idea behind a Momentum System to casting being a solution to the standard DnD "Standard Action to Rule Them All" sort of thing with casters taking a single action to win.

So you can't just cast your 9th level spell right off the bat. Either you have to spend time prepping for it, opening up your magical conduits to channel enough power, or you open it up gradually by casting smaller, more easily channeled spells to warm up to the higher magics.

Also means you can't just "stop" casting either. You get into that trance where you're flinging around your highest level spells, you can't just suddenly stop. You have to cool down or you end up with consequences like fatigue.

Like I said, haven't applied it to DnD before. Have applied it to some other systems. No real complaints. Those who have played it kinda liked the feeling of warming up to a source of destruction. Those who weren't flinging spells were appreciative that the momentum system basically gave them First Strike advantages against Casters.

And thematically it can kinda fit. Casters are supposed to be high power. Over time. With prep and a chance to do something unmolested to change the battle. The guy with the sword is generally the one who should have the advantage in a single standard action. So at the start of a fight, the guys with the blades are the ones doing the real damage and being the most effective. By the end of the fight, the casters are far outpacing the fighters.

Mundane characters remain more viable because they are always at full power, effectively. Mage characters always remain viable as they are the "Closers" of a fight, basically how they normally are right now, just it's going to be delayed 1-3 turns. And it makes players slightly more interested in their lower level spell slots.

But the problem with it, along with a lot of caster fixes is that if you're playing with veteran players, they're likely to just say "No" to anything in similar vein to this. Because they accept Casting as it is. And anything clearly weaker will get cries of "Terrible Nerf!" and such.

[AntiTrust]

Momentum systems. I've kinda toyed around with it a bit. I haven't applied it to DnD but it's worked for a few other games.

The idea behind a Momentum System to casting being a solution to the standard DnD "Standard Action to Rule Them All" sort of thing with casters taking a single action to win.

So you can't just cast your 9th level spell right off the bat. Either you have to spend time prepping for it, opening up your magical conduits to channel enough power, or you open it up gradually by casting smaller, more easily channeled spells to warm up to the higher magics.

Also means you can't just "stop" casting either. You get into that trance where you're flinging around your highest level spells, you can't just suddenly stop. You have to cool down or you end up with consequences like fatigue.



Isn't that like how older D&D versions did it with multiple round casting times and if the target was no longer valid the spell fails?

[ArcturusV]

Similar. Same problem from another angle I suppose, particularly if you combined it with the Casting Time stuff where it slowed your initiative by a number depending on the spell.

It's less of a "Screw" though because a mage can always do something with a Momentum system. It may not be the thing they ultimately want, "What do you mean I can't just cast Time Stop at the start of the fight?" but they still can do something "Fine... I guess I'll cast a Wall of Chains instead until I can cast a level 9 spell."

[Abaddona]

Hmmm, maybe simple Concentration checks to guarantee that the spell will have effect as intended? If concentration check fails then spells has a percentage chance to go wild. Also you can give players option to cast the spell longer thus lowering the difficulty of the check (noone wants this 9-level spell to backlash so Mr. Caster should take his time).

[Xervous]

Things to avoid when going about this.

% chance of success. The game already has enough of it, tacking this onto casters makes it less fun for everyone. The player doesn't know if he's going to be able to contribute, his party doesn't know if he's able to contribute, and the DM doesn't know if his encounter is suddenly going to get wiped by a lucky roll from the mage.

Blood magic. Paying CON or HP to cast just limits how much an unoptimized caster can put out in a day. Good players will find ways around the limits, and the good spells are still as good as ever.



My vote goes to longer casting times and/or interesting RP stuff

[Eslin]

Adding to the list of things that don't work -

Increased casting times are just a flat nerf to casters, and screw over the unoptimised ones far more than they screw over someone who knows how to get around them or which spells will still be good with a long cast.

Flat changes to how magic is cast, some spells are already not worth it.



Perhaps a 40k style set of random consequences for casting? Choose between casting at -1/2CL for no chance, CL for some chance and +1/2CL for guaranteed consequences. Have a table of random effects (freak weather, summon aberrations, instantly hostile wildlife, planar breach) etc that you roll a d20 on and add the caster level to, in order to make stronger casters have stronger potential side effects. Magic becomes less safe but no less powerful and it adds tactical options for players rather than just boring % chance to fail like ASF.

[Maginomicon]

There's a much simpler solution.
Any spell you hate because it's stupid, ban.
Any spell you think too powerful, make an incantation.


Any sufficiently powerful spell could be modified to have aspects of the incantations system (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/magic/incantations.htm) (most notably a long casting time and backlash effects). A lot of overpowered spells are overpowered ultimately because of their casting time and relatively-low cost. Requiring such spells be single-caster incantations can solve a lot of this issue. Naturally, you can rule that the increased casting times for the incantation aspects of the spells cannot be shortened by any means period.

For example, Mage's Disjunction, while ridiculously powerful, loses a lot of its zing when it takes so long to cast that it can't be used in combat, has a chance of failure dependent on skill checks (which don't have to be all arcana checks), has a backlash on failure, and still ultimately expends a spell slot regardless. The backlash for Mage's Disjunction could be anything you want, but probably should fit the flavor of the spell (i.e. "disjunctioning" your own spellcasting ability for a week).

The incantation method avoids the pitfalls of the flat %-chance option and the long-casting-time option by combining them in a creative way that an optimized caster can't ignore.

[Amnestic]

Nerfing spellcasters isn't the problem (see: Warmage, Beguiler, Bard, Dread Necromancer, Duskblade - all perfectly reasonable classes with partial or full spellcasting).

Nerfing spells is what you need. And you need to do so in a way which isn't avoidable by optimised players but will seriously harm unoptimised players (which a lot of 'quick fixes' tend to do). I'm not sure there's a fast way to do it short of either a) combing through spell lists and adjusting spells as needed or b) dealing with bad spells as they come up in play.


Hmmm, maybe simple Concentration checks to guarantee that the spell will have effect as intended? If concentration check fails then spells has a percentage chance to go wild. Also you can give players option to cast the spell longer thus lowering the difficulty of the check (noone wants this 9-level spell to backlash so Mr. Caster should take his time).

An optimised caster will hit the concentration check every time. An upoptimised caster (who isn't your target for nerf to begin with) will not. The end result is that the guy who was breaking campaigns to begin with continues to do so with impunity and the guy throwing out Fireballs and Lightning Bolts is now worse, when he was no more dangerous than the Barbarian.

[ddude987]

There's a much simpler solution.
Any spell you hate because it's stupid, ban.
Any spell you think too powerful, make an incantation.


Banning things is very inelegant and is simply a bandaid to the problem. Rather than patch the problem with the easiest solution and say its fixed, actually fixing the problem is a better route. Banning spells that are stupid still just hurts lower op characters.

[CaladanMoonblad]

The old Ravenloft campaign world had serious consequences for magic users, regarding Powers checks to guard against corruption from the Dark Powers which ruled the Demi-Plane of Dread.

It's your plane and game world. Feel free to borrow from Ravenloft to the degree you think appropriate. White Wolf for instance, published the d20 version of Ravenloft under the Sword & Sorcery product line until 2006, when the license reverted back to Wizards (who incorporated the Demi-Plane into 4th edition but I'm unaware of a standalone product). You might also find some older 2nd Edition Ravenloft books floating around; the Powers check / Corruption system didn't have many changes if memory serves.

[Juntao112]

Banning things is very inelegant and is simply a bandaid to the problem. Rather than patch the problem with the easiest solution and say its fixed, actually fixing the problem is a better route. Banning spells that are stupid still just hurts lower op characters.

Low op characters wouldn't use Shivering Touch or Ray of Stupidity, though.

[Gerrtt]

If memory serves (and my memory is nill on this subject because I've never played anything earlier than 3.0) there used to be rules for this in older editions. Like haste subtracted a year from your life, etc?

If you could somehow get a list of what those kinds of restrictions were maybe you could tailor them to your game.

[AntiTrust]

In DarkSun, applying metamagic to a spell draws power from the earth killing off flora/fauna in a surrounding area in proportion. In that setting the metamagic was free and the planet a desert wasteland as a result so maybe that won't be what you're looking for, but I thought I'd point it out because it certainly falls under the "consequences for being a caster"

[Andezzar]

Unless you want a mechanical nerf, make something (mostly) visual, like the shamanic mask from Shadowrun, or (temporary) withering of plants in the vicinity of the caster, or have the caster cry blood tears. Just show that the caster is a freak. Make the effects less pronounced if the Caster Level is smaller than the ECL.

WHFB/40K's perils of the warp mechanic will probably just result in people not using casters, because as it is it will kill any caster sooner or later.

What could be interesting is similar to stellar performances by bards is that casting will call attention from powerful outsiders to the caster.

[KillingAScarab]

If memory serves (and my memory is nill on this subject because I've never played anything earlier than 3.0) there used to be rules for this in older editions. Like haste subtracted a year from your life, etc?

If you could somehow get a list of what those kinds of restrictions were maybe you could tailor them to your game.For 2nd edition, the part about haste aging by a year isn't listed in its spell description, but is an example given in the "Other Characteristics" section discussing age. It also suggests magical aging doesn't grant mental ability score bonuses, but doesn't have the foresight to say you should track magical aging separately; add it directly to your character's age on the sheet. Oh, and every DM should determine the maximum age every character will live to and never tell the player. Bah.

Someone wrote an incredibly Byzantine "fix" for 3.5 in the homebrew section a year or two ago incorporating horrendous penalties to casting spells. Every school of magic was no longer just a collection of related effects, but had its own set of rules and risks associated with them. No one would ever be willing to learn such a thing unless they were also a person willing to hold up the entire game to argue over minutia. I wish I had bookmarked it, as I thought it was a lesson in what not to do in designing a tabletop RPG. It's also the first thing that comes to mind when reading Balor01's post.

[Twilight Jack]

Although I didn't always appreciate it at the time (being young and foolish, as I was), older editions of D&D more or less had the right approach here, which 3.x stripped away in the name of "fun."


Casters didn't gain bonus spells from a high casting stat. Well, clerics did in some editions, but they needed them for the healing (since they couldn't cast those spontaneously). By the time you hit 9th level or so, 1-2 extra spells per level really go a long way towards making your wizard unstoppable. Assuming a "meager" Intelligence of 18 at 9th level, a 3.x Wizard is getting expeditious retreat, mirror image, fly, and stoneskin for free when compared to his counterpart from an earlier edition.
The ability to save against a spell was a function of the power level of the target alone. Powerful foes just didn't fall to "save or lose" tactics, no matter how high you boosted your wizard's Intelligence or how you built your character. Coupled with the aforementioned lack of bonus spells, this made spamming SoD spells against an ancient dragon an exercise in stupidity, rather than best practices.
Spellcasting was always at least a full-round action (you couldn't move or do anything else while casting even the simplest spell).
Spell casters were ridiculously vulnerable from the moment they declared their intention to cast a spell until the moment it went off. A thrown rock dealing a single point of damage was enough to ruin the spell, with no concentration check allowed. In addition, casters lost any Dexterity bonus to AC while casting, as dodging would have the same effect on their concentration as being hit with the rock.
Powerful spells often had serious drawbacks, risks, or consequences. Haste aged the recipients. The earliest summoning spells required the caster to maintain concentration on the spell in order to retain control of the creature summoned. A poorly planned teleport could kill you and everyone along for the ride. Heck, even simple area effect damage spells were far more dicey a proposition. They didn't discretely fill a clearly defined template on a battle map in such a way that a wizard could surgically place a fireball with no worries about hitting the allies engaged in melee with his targets.


Back when 3.0 first came out, I cheered along with every other player of Magic-Users that so many of these restrictions had been removed or reduced in impact. Mostly, I was thinking about the survivability of my 1st level wizard, and I guess the guys at WotC were too. It took some time to appreciate how all these changes would impact the game as a whole.

[Starbuck_II]

There's a much simpler solution.
Any spell you hate because it's stupid, ban.
Any spell you think too powerful, make an incantation.


Any sufficiently powerful spell could be modified to have aspects of the incantations system (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/magic/incantations.htm) (most notably a long casting time and backlash effects). A lot of overpowered spells are overpowered ultimately because of their casting time and relatively-low cost. Requiring such spells be single-caster incantations can solve a lot of this issue. Naturally, you can rule that the increased casting times for the incantation aspects of the spells cannot be shortened by any means period.

For example, Mage's Disjunction, while ridiculously powerful, loses a lot of its zing when it takes so long to cast that it can't be used in combat, has a chance of failure dependent on skill checks (which don't have to be all arcana checks), has a backlash on failure, and still ultimately expends a spell slot regardless. The backlash for Mage's Disjunction could be anything you want, but probably should fit the flavor of the spell (i.e. "disjunctioning" your own spellcasting ability for a week).

The incantation method avoids the pitfalls of the flat %-chance option and the long-casting-time option by combining them in a creative way that an optimized caster can't ignore.

Someone needs to do more incantations in homebrew.

[TuggyNE]

Banning things is very inelegant and is simply a bandaid to the problem. Rather than patch the problem with the easiest solution and say its fixed, actually fixing the problem is a better route. Banning spells that are stupid still just hurts lower op characters.

But spells are the problem. They are almost the entirety of the problem, in fact. So why would you do anything but fix spells? In particular, why would you take the lazy way out and try to design some one-size-fits-all patch to make casting more dangerous or less powerful?

[Abaddona]

Hmmm... what if we houserule magic in such way:

1. Around a caster tend to gather "mana particles" - 1 unit for round.
2. Each spellcaster provide spellcasting class/5 "mana particles".
3. To cast a spell of 5 level you need to gather a minimum 5 units of "mana particles" (sum of those gathered around you and those provided by your spellcasting class).
4. Casted spell immediately increases quantity of "mana particles" gathered aroud you by those spell level.
5. Casting powerfull spells visually changes character (glowing runes appearing on character body).
6. High density of "mana particles" can be sensed from far away (for example casting 9th level spell can be sensed in 100 km radius).
7. High densities of "mana particles" can be sensed and analyzed some time after casting spell (few days or even whole years if multiple epic spells were casted).
8. By analyzing aura of gathered "mana particles" one can know which spells were casted or even who casted them.
9. Caster can attempt to shut down his casting - by doing so "mana particles" stop gather around him but he is also incapable of casting. Both shutting and reactivating his spellcasting is move-action.

By adding such rules:
1. High level casters cannot start the encounter by "time stop" or other powerfull high level spells, but still can contribute to fight casting usefull lower level spells (20 level wizard can start encounter with 5 level or 4 level spell - depending if he had his spellcasting active or suppresed when encounter started).
2. Altough powerfull wizard can cast powerfull spells in second round of combat - doing so will end in whole neighbourhood knowing that someone casted such spell. Normal non-paranoid wizards rather don't take many precautions, paranoid ones - well, now they have to take many more to mask lingering aura and glowing symbols on their bodies (which in turn will add additional symbols and aura - kinda like problems with providing fodder for draft animals). Their enemies also have now means to easily investigate spellcasters capabilities and prepare accordingly. Also some spells combinations now are harder to execute considering that someone can make spellcraft check to know who and which spell casted recently in the area and caster will have glowing marks on their body when stripped (i presume that if someone will know that you recently casted "glibness" then you will have rather steep penalty for your bluff checks... multispell combinations also will give aura strong enough that everyone interested will know that something's going on).

[Beldar]

Mostly I just use other casters to oppose casters.
It works fairly well for me.

But if you want to nerf casters, then the best system for that I've ever heard is the one proposed above called a Momentum system.
If a caster has to start out combat casting first level spells & then can move gradually up thru spell levels as the combat progresses, everybody else gets plenty of chance to feel relevant, the caster can be doing something the whole time, and if the fight goes long enough he still gets to fire off the nukes.

There is something for everybody here.
I was surprised to find a system for nerfing casters that I like, but I like this one.

[Amnestic]

Mostly I just use other casters to oppose casters.
It works fairly well for me.

But if you want to nerf casters, then the best system for that I've ever heard is the one proposed above called a Momentum system.
If a caster has to start out combat casting first level spells & then can move gradually up thru spell levels as the combat progresses, everybody else gets plenty of chance to feel relevant, the caster can be doing something the whole time, and if the fight goes long enough he still gets to fire off the nukes.


This would just encourage me to metamagic the hell out of a first level spell. It would also encourage me to start taking more buff oriented spells to use pre-combat (which is apparently not affected by the Momentum system...just 'cos?) so I'd be outdoing the rest of the party in combat regardless.

Just like the other blanket systems, it also harms those who don't need to be harmed - Bards, Dread Necros, Warmages, Beguilers, and even Paladins and Rangers (spellcasters who least need their spellcasting nerfed!) since they now have to jump through hoops to get to the spells they actually want.

Also, due to the rocket-tag nature of 3.5, combats don't often last more than 5-6 rounds, meaning that short of Quickening their lower level spells with metamagic reducers constantly, those with 7-9th level spells will never get to use them in combat - meaning they'll just use those spell slots for utility things like...Shapechange, Gate or Wish anyway? That's not really a problem you've fixed.

So...yeah, hate that plan, because again: It hurts those lower optimised more than the higher optimised and hurts the caster classes who don't need to be hurt at all.

[Vizzerdrix]

A house rule I've always wanted to try.

Attempting to cast a spell deals 1d4 damage per spell's level and requires a D20 roll. Failure to exceed the spells level fizzles the spell. A natural 1 permanently damages the casting stat by 1. A Dex modifier equal to the level of a spell being cast is needed for somatic components. For every 1 point under the spells level a caster suffers a %5 ACF. Verbal components require a Preform: Oratory check of spell level x5, or the spell fails.

[Amnestic]

A house rule I've always wanted to try.

Attempting to cast a spell deals 1d4 damage per spell's level and requires a D20 roll. Failure to exceed the spells level fizzles the spell. A natural 1 permanently damages the casting stat by 1. A Dex modifier equal to the level of a spell being cast is needed for somatic components. For every 1 point under the spells level a caster suffers a %5 ACF.

I like how you edited the bold part from the original "A natural 1 automatically kills the caster." Decided it was too obvious?

[Vizzerdrix]

Indeed it was :tongue:

[Pally din]

The Cerebrosis feat gives access to a limited list of spells, each of which has the option to be more powerful at the cost of a chance of loss of control. So, the player can decide on the standard power and have complete control, OR, if they need the power badly enough they can risk loss of control. Since most of those spells are odd creature summons, IIRC, even loss of control might not be too bad. But, there is no stat maxing trick that will ever lower the los of control chance IF the player decided to go for it. I think that is a nice balance. And the DM can tempt the player into making that rash choice. Muhahaha.

So, let's apply that principle to other spells. Mirror image: 1 image, or 1+1 image with a 10% chance that the extra image is a shadow duplicate that tries to kill you. Etc, for any spells that have variables or can be made to have variables.

[avr]

But spells are the problem. They are almost the entirety of the problem, in fact. So why would you do anything but fix spells? In particular, why would you take the lazy way out and try to design some one-size-fits-all patch to make casting more dangerous or less powerful?
Because there are thousands of spells in D&D across dozens of books (not an exaggeration), and it's not always obvious which would need to be banned/nerfed/changed before they are used to put the casting classes more on a par with the mundanes.

Sometimes laziness is being smart.

[Saidoro]

Any blanket modification to the spellcasting system will neccesarily impact unoptimized characters harder than optimized ones. If you want consequences to casting I would recommend adding them individually to each spell, with stronger spells incurring harsher consequences. Fireball, for example could have something trivial like a risk of setting things on fire while polymorph could have something potentially serious like losing your mind and acting like whatever you turned into for the duration.

Banning things is very inelegant and is simply a bandaid to the problem. Rather than patch the problem with the easiest solution and say its fixed, actually fixing the problem is a better route. Banning spells that are stupid still just hurts lower op characters.
I'll give you inelegant, but that's actually one of the most effective and efficient ways of fixing casting without removing all the fun effects entirely.

Powerful spells often had serious drawbacks, risks, or consequences. Haste aged the recipients. The earliest summoning spells required the caster to maintain concentration on the spell in order to retain control of the creature summoned. A poorly planned teleport could kill you and everyone along for the ride. Heck, even simple area effect damage spells were far more dicey a proposition. They didn't discretely fill a clearly defined template on a battle map in such a way that a wizard could surgically place a fireball with no worries about hitting the allies engaged in melee with his targets.
This is the only good idea on the list. The rest are largely annoying and arbitrary.

[Amnestic]

Because there are thousands of spells in D&D across dozens of books (not an exaggeration), and it's not always obvious which would need to be banned/nerfed/changed before they are used to put the casting classes more on a par with the mundanes.

Sometimes laziness is being smart.

So how about you nerf the ones you know about and then deal with the ones you don't know about when they become a problem?

[Jeff the Green]

Someone needs to do more incantations in homebrew.

I've done a few (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=254498), specifically ones to allow anyone to create magic items and resurrect the dead (very useful in extended dungeon crawls). I think I did one at tuggyne's behest a month or two ago, but I'm not sure where or what it was. :smallannoyed:

I also made these for my Ravenloft campaign.

Create Blaspheme
Necromancy [evil]
Effective Level: 6th
Skill CheckKnowledge (religion) DC 21, 6 successes
Failure: Death
Components: V, S, M, F, B
Casting Time: 1 week
Range: Touch
Target: One corpse
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Fortitude negates; see text
Spell Resistance: No

You raise a close family member (a mother, father, brother, sister, son, or daughter) to a mockery of life as a blaspheme (LM p. 85). They retain some semblance of their personality and memories, but their Intelligence is extremely limited and they are unspeakably evil, delighting in petty cruelties and hungering for the flesh of the living.

In addition, all corpses within 500 ft. at the completion of the incantation rise as infected zombies (EtCR p. 32) or infected skeletons (EtCR p. 43). Every living creature within 500 ft. must make a DC 13 Fortitude saving throw or contract the necromantic infection. All infected zombies and infected skeletons produced by this incantation or by contracting the necromantic infection initiated by this disease is instantly destroyed as soon as the blaspheme is, and all living creatures with the necromantic infection are cured of it 6 rounds after the blaspheme's destruction.

Failure
The caster dies instantly and rises as an infected zombie 1d4 rounds later.

Backlash Component
The caster's depravity and corruption each increase by 10.

Material Component
Gems worth 15,000 GP.

Focus
A bell worth 500 GP and a chalice worth 1000 GP, both made from silver obtained from holy relics blighted in unholy rites.


Control Spell Resistance
Transmutation
Effective Level: 4th
Skill CheckKnowledge (religion) DC 30, 4 successes
Failure: Wild resistance
Components: V, S, B
Casting Time: 10 minutes
Range: Touch
Target: Willing creature with spell resistance touched
Duration: 24 hours
Saving Throw: None
Spell Resistance: No

The target gains the ability to raise or lower their spell resistance as a free action once per round on their turn. Once so raised or lowered, it remains raised or lowered until they decide to change it.

Failure
The target has a 50% chance each of having their spell resistance lowered to 0 or increased by 10 for 24 hours. This incantation cannot be attempted on this creature again until this effect wears off.

Backlash Component
The caster is exhausted for 1d6 hours.

[ArcturusV]

On Momentum System comments:

Actually Metamagic wouldn't be that much more valuable. If I did put it into DnD, a metamagiced 1st level spell taking up a 5th level spell slot would still count as a 5th level spell for how I'd judge the Momentum System on it. If you're using some cheesy free Metamagic stuff, that's really just a null point.

There's still lots of low level spells that are still viable and useful even in high level encounters. Part of the reasons why spellcasters rock face so hard. You don't NEED that 6th level spell to completely shut down an encounter. Played right a 3th level will do it just fine. And you got a lot of those available.

I'd probably set it up so the starting momentum level would be a factor of your highest level. So maybe starting at Max Spell Level/3, Minimum 0.

So the guy with level 9 spells would be starting off with level 3 spells. And if you can't find level 3 spells that would be useful even at that level, you're not looking very hard.

Buffing before a fight? Unless you're maxing out Persist Cheese, which I've never seen in game but have heard about on board, it still means your "Buff before fight, win" thing would be something where between spotting hostiles, and engaging them, you'd need something like 2 minutes. Possible, but not always guaranteed. Unless you're just paranoid and end up burning buff spells everytime you open a door, turn a corner, blink, etc. Again, possible. Though it would lead to a really short day for the would be mage.

I'd have to work it out. I haven't done it before for DnD. I've done it for other games. Worked out well. Did it for some games that are similar in spirit. But DnD is more expansive and would have a lot of corner cases to iron out.

[Grod_The_Giant]

The momentum thing could work, especially if we start putting a little more thought into it.

Make your "initial momentum level" scale with level, as ArcturusV suggested, so you never need more than a few rounds to get to your highest level.
Come up with a way to gain momentum without actually casting a spell-- say, spend a standard action concentrating to gain a spell level's worth of momentum. (That way you avoid "I don't have any 3rd level spells left, now I can't get at my higher-level ones" and "what happens with out-of-combat casting?" issues)
Maybe make a special option for gish classes? Say, take a swift action to gain a spell level's worth of momentum as long as they don't cast that turn.
Adjust the momentum scaling based on the highest level spell you can cast. Say, casters who get up to 9th level spells start at (highest spell level available/3), casters who get up to 6th start at (highest spell level/2), and casters who get up to 4th can start with the second-highest spell level. Or something, I dunno.

Messing with momentum mechanics would actually be a generally interesting way of distinguishing different casting classes, now that I think about it.



I've said this many times before, and I'll say it again, but long casting times are terrible for fun. Oh, they sound like they'd be good for balance and strategy and the like, but no element of a game should ever require a player to sit there for an extended period of time doing nothing while everyone else gets to take actions. It's not a trivial amount of time, either-- even in a good group, a round can easily by 15 minutes long. And when you consider that most fights end in a handful of rounds...

It also hits lower-op casters extra hard, since they'll pick spells with a chance of failing, have lower save DCs, and so on. It's bad enough spending three rounds (ie, an hour of real time) sitting there saying "I'm still casting;" having it all be for nothing would probably lead to table-flipping. This is especially true of classes like the wizard and sorcerer, who really can't do anything interesting when they're not casting.

[avr]

So how about you nerf the ones you know about and then deal with the ones you don't know about when they become a problem?
That sounds like how to really anger players who think they've made smart choices, with some justification too. An upfront change which they can then work with is fairer.

Also it can still be easier if you were going to nerf, ban or change dozens of spells to achieve a similar goal. I don't think you could make much of a mark on D&D's balance by taking out or changing say 10 spells. That'd barely cover the polymorph line.

On ArcturusV's initial suggestion just above, I don't know that I'd use minimum zero (cantrip) - 1st level spells seem a point where the caster won't absolutely have to waste an action first up, cantrips are an almost guaranteed waste of an action in a fight.

[Amnestic]

That sounds like how to really anger players who think they've made smart choices, with some justification too. An upfront change which they can then work with is fairer.

Only if your players are unreasonable. If you come to them and say "Look, you've picked this spell, and it's pretty cool, but it's kind of dominating everything. Let's work something out, 'cos the campaign can't continue as it is with that spell in play." then most people will probably be okay with it.


Also it can still be easier if you were going to nerf, ban or change dozens of spells to achieve a similar goal. I don't think you could make much of a mark on D&D's balance by taking out or changing say 10 spells. That'd barely cover the polymorph line.

"Easier" yes, but if you're after "easy" then just ban all Tier 1s/2s and be done with it. I dunno why you need to do some convoluted spell mechanic change thing which will affect all spellcasters to do that.

And no matter how much you change Momentum or anything else, it's hurting those spellcasters who don't need to be hurt. I assume the original goal of this exercise is to make sure mundanes don't feel overshadowed - so why hurt the Warmage or hurt the already lackluster Paladin to do so? They're not overshadowing anyone at all.

[TuggyNE]

Because there are thousands of spells in D&D across dozens of books (not an exaggeration), and it's not always obvious which would need to be banned/nerfed/changed before they are used to put the casting classes more on a par with the mundanes.

I'm aware. It's a big problem, but, so far as I know, that's the only way you can use existing spells and classes without messing things up more.

The other alternative is to write those spells all off as a loss and create a whole new subsystem that works quite differently and uses quite different effects that don't draw directly on the legacy material. Which is basically the same thing, except probably smaller-scale in result.

What you simply cannot do is devise a generalized solution that fixes all those spells at once, because the problems from those spells arise in a vast multitude of different ways.


I've done a few (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=254498), specifically ones to allow anyone to create magic items and resurrect the dead (very useful in extended dungeon crawls). I think I did one at tuggyne's behest a month or two ago, but I'm not sure where or what it was. :smallannoyed:

Hmm. Sure enough! [Fear my l33t search-fu! :smallwink:]

[Jeff the Green]

Hmm. Sure enough! [Fear my l33t search-fu! :smallwink:]

Yay! That's definitely my favorite of the ones I've written.

[avr]

Only if your players are unreasonable. If you come to them and say "Look, you've picked this spell, and it's pretty cool, but it's kind of dominating everything. Let's work something out, 'cos the campaign can't continue as it is with that spell in play." then most people will probably be okay with it.
Not everyone. Not at least two of the people I game with and probably many more I don't. People can have a marvelous ability to not see your point when it's against their perceived interests.

"Easier" yes, but if you're after "easy" then just ban all Tier 1s/2s and be done with it. I dunno why you need to do some convoluted spell mechanic change thing which will affect all spellcasters to do that.

And no matter how much you change Momentum or anything else, it's hurting those spellcasters who don't need to be hurt. I assume the original goal of this exercise is to make sure mundanes don't feel overshadowed - so why hurt the Warmage or hurt the already lackluster Paladin to do so? They're not overshadowing anyone at all.
See, as long as wizards, sorcerers and especially psions are in the game and unhindered the warmage doesn't have an excuse to exist anyway. I've never actually seen one in play and IMO there are solid reasons for that. I don't agree either that there would be no way to set up momentum to hinder wizards more than warmages or paladins.

Yes, you can ban all tier 1 & 2 classes. It's been done. That too has other changes you have to deal with, when you need restoration or raise dead or when you need to convert an existing NPC from the adventure you're stealing from for the game tonight. It's not as simple as you make it sound.

[Amnestic]

See, as long as wizards, sorcerers and especially psions are in the game and unhindered the warmage doesn't have an excuse to exist anyway.

How about the reason that someone wants to play them? You could easily turn around and make the argument that "as long as T1 classes exist, no other classes have an excuse to exist anyway." This was the subject of a many, many page thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=267020) just recently. And frankly as long as someone sees the Warmage class and goes "cool, I wanna play one", that's all you need as a reason to exist.



I've never actually seen one in play and IMO there are solid reasons for that. I don't agree either that there would be no way to set up momentum to hinder wizards more than warmages or paladins.

Doesn't matter if you're setting it up to hinder wizards more than the other casters, the problem is that you're hindering them at all. They are not the problem. Not even slightly. But you're nerfing them anyway for god knows what reason.



Yes, you can ban all tier 1 & 2 classes. It's been done. That too has other changes you have to deal with, when you need restoration or raise dead

What exactly is the problem with the Healer class (Tier 5) providing those services?



or when you need to convert an existing NPC from the adventure you're stealing from for the game tonight. It's not as simple as you make it sound.

Oh noes, minor prep changes! However will the poor DM's heart manage? :smallfrown:

[Belial_the_Leveler]

What's wrong with the following fix?


1) Use Pathfinder spell list, metamagic feat list and classes.

2) Add the same special provision to Gate that Wish has - calling creatures over a given PL can make enemies for you, among other problems.

3) Give a boost to the skill use of mundane characters for non-combat utility.

[Andezzar]

Oh noes, minor prep changes! However will the poor DM's heart manage? :smallfrown:Usually not a problem, but when the plot requires a single character to cast several different spells that are not on the same list, it can get tricky. I'm not sure if such adventures exist.


1) Use Pathfinder spell list, metamagic feat list and classes.If you do that, why not play pathfinder in the first place? Since I have never played PF and only skimmed over the rulebook, I cannot say if that would remove or mitigate the problems of 3.5's magic system.

[Jeff the Green]

Oh noes, minor prep changes! However will the poor DM's heart manage? :smallfrown:

Or, y'know, plot magic. The NPC has a contract with a demon prince/astral deva to get around normal limitations. They have an artifact that does it.

Just like it's okay to give an NPC necromancer more zombies than they can technically control, it's okay to give an NPC caster the ability to cast magic better/faster/stronger than they normally could.

[Andezzar]

Or, y'know, plot magic. The NPC has a contract with a demon prince/astral deva to get around normal limitations. They have an artifact that does it.

Just like it's okay to give an NPC necromancer more zombies than they can technically control, it's okay to give an NPC caster the ability to cast magic better/faster/stronger than they normally could.Is that OK? IMHO the rules for the PCs should also apply to NPCs. Everything else is cheating.

[Amnestic]

Is that OK? IMHO the rules for the PCs should also apply to NPCs. Everything else is cheating.

Really depends on the DM in question. Some think "whatever I use, the PCs can use" and vice versa, while others will bend the rules to tell a 'better' story. Rule 0 and all that.

Artifacts are entirely under the DM's purview though, are they not? It's not breaking the rules for him to create a new artifact which allows him to satisfy the requirements of the (poorly written) adventure.

[Jeff the Green]

Is that OK? IMHO the rules for the PCs should also apply to NPCs. Everything else is cheating.

It's no more cheating than homebrewing a monster. Have a template:


Easy Magic Mage
Easy magic mage is an applied template that can be added to any creature capable of casting 3rd-level spells.

Size and Type
Unchanged.

Hit Dice
Same as base creature.

Speed
Same as base creature.

Special Qualities
An easy magic mage can cast spells without waiting for magic energy to accumulate around them.

Environment
Same as base creature.

Organization
Same as base creature.

Challenge Rating
As base creature +2

Treasure
Same as base creature.

Alignment
Same as base creature.

Advancement
Same as base creature.

Level Adjustment –

There are plenty of creatures with LA – (unsuitable for players); unless you want to completely strike those from the game, there's no reason not to have this sort of thing.

For artifacts, they're supposed to be unique.

Edit: Partial ninja.


Really depends on the DM in question. Some think "whatever I use, the PCs can use" and vice versa, while others will bend the rules to tell a 'better' story. Rule 0 and all that.

I don't think there are really any DMs like that, unless they either never throw animals or zombies at their players or are fine with their players playing mindless creatures.

[avr]

How about the reason that someone wants to play them? You could easily turn around and make the argument that "as long as T1 classes exist, no other classes have an excuse to exist anyway." This was the subject of a many, many page thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=267020) just recently. And frankly as long as someone sees the Warmage class and goes "cool, I wanna play one", that's all you need as a reason to exist.
Like I said, as far as I can tell the warmage doesn't exist in the games I've played. Your argument might be better with a class which is less completely replaced by T1/2 classes.

Doesn't matter if you're setting it up to hinder wizards more than the other casters, the problem is that you're hindering them at all. They are not the problem. Not even slightly. But you're nerfing them anyway for god knows what reason.
Say the initial spell level you can cast is based off character level rather than off the highest spell level you can cast. Paladins likely aren't nerfed at all. 2/3 casters like bards are sometimes hindered, sometimes not. Wizards are hindered from a pretty early stage, good. Mundanes definitely aren't effected which is the intent of the change; bards etc outclass rogues etc as written.

What exactly is the problem with the Healer class (Tier 5) providing those services?
Forgot about that one. The actual game I saw banned 9-level casters rather than based on tier. OK, you win that point.

Oh noes, minor prep changes! However will the poor DM's heart manage? :smallfrown:
If you're using much of a premade adventure it's likely to save time. Creating D&D characters, especially casters does take time.

[Andezzar]

Really depends on the DM in question. Some think "whatever I use, the PCs can use" and vice versa, while others will bend the rules to tell a 'better' story. Rule 0 and all that.I agree.


Artifacts are entirely under the DM's purview though, are they not? It's not breaking the rules for him to create a new artifact which allows him to satisfy the requirements of the (poorly written) adventure.That is a matter of opinion. It definitely is homebrewing. Whether creating stuff that breaks essential game rules (especially those invented by the group) is good or bad, is up to the individual group.


It's no more cheating than homebrewing a monster. Have a template:I'd feel cheated If a DM sprung that on me without previous consent. What particularly irks me is that the template can be added to any creature (including those usually eligible for PC status) but makes them inaccessible to players. This seems to me like saying "na na na I can do that but you can't."


For artifacts, they're supposed to be unique.Major Artifacts are unique, minor ones aren't.


I don't think there are really any DMs like that, unless they either never throw animals or zombies at their players or are fine with their players playing mindless creatures.That is not what I meant. I mean that a group of people agree to play by a set of rules (the core books+any agreed upon supplements). These rules tell the players (this includes the DM) what they can and can't do. All players (again including the DM) should abide by those rules. This does not mean that they are all bound by the same subset of rules. The DM can and should use anything from the "DM only" sections of the rules.

[Amnestic]

Say the initial spell level you can cast is based off character level rather than off the highest spell level you can cast. Paladins likely aren't nerfed at all. 2/3 casters like bards are sometimes hindered, sometimes not. Wizards are hindered from a pretty early stage, good.

The fact that you're sometimes hindering Bards and always hindering the Duskblade, Dread Necro and Beguiler (and Healer) who have 9th level spells makes it all the worse though.



Mundanes definitely aren't effected which is the intent of the change; bards etc outclass rogues etc as written.

Okay, but do they outclass Factotums? Not to any significant degree. How about Crusaders? Wildshape Rangers? Binders?

Nnnnnope. Is the intent of the change to stop T1s/T2s breaking the game? Is it to buff mundanes (why would you need to buff the Warblade?)? Is it to create a more even playing field?

Buff a class because the class needs a buff. Nerf a spell because a spell needs a nerf. Or ban a class if you're lazy about it. Hurting classes that don't need hurting solely because they derive their powers from a magical source instead of a mundane one doesn't make any sense to me.


If you're using much of a premade adventure it's likely to save time. Creating D&D characters, especially casters does take time.

So have him strike an Infernal Bargain with a Devil for magical powers. Or give him a template. Or something else entirely. Or just have him be a Wizard. You're the DM. Rule Zero exists for a reason.

[FreakyCheeseMan]

Momentum systems. I've kinda toyed around with it a bit. I haven't applied it to DnD but it's worked for a few other games.

The idea behind a Momentum System to casting being a solution to the standard DnD "Standard Action to Rule Them All" sort of thing with casters taking a single action to win.

So you can't just cast your 9th level spell right off the bat. Either you have to spend time prepping for it, opening up your magical conduits to channel enough power, or you open it up gradually by casting smaller, more easily channeled spells to warm up to the higher magics.

Also means you can't just "stop" casting either. You get into that trance where you're flinging around your highest level spells, you can't just suddenly stop. You have to cool down or you end up with consequences like fatigue.

Like I said, haven't applied it to DnD before. Have applied it to some other systems. No real complaints. Those who have played it kinda liked the feeling of warming up to a source of destruction. Those who weren't flinging spells were appreciative that the momentum system basically gave them First Strike advantages against Casters.

And thematically it can kinda fit. Casters are supposed to be high power. Over time. With prep and a chance to do something unmolested to change the battle. The guy with the sword is generally the one who should have the advantage in a single standard action. So at the start of a fight, the guys with the blades are the ones doing the real damage and being the most effective. By the end of the fight, the casters are far outpacing the fighters.

Mundane characters remain more viable because they are always at full power, effectively. Mage characters always remain viable as they are the "Closers" of a fight, basically how they normally are right now, just it's going to be delayed 1-3 turns. And it makes players slightly more interested in their lower level spell slots.

But the problem with it, along with a lot of caster fixes is that if you're playing with veteran players, they're likely to just say "No" to anything in similar vein to this. Because they accept Casting as it is. And anything clearly weaker will get cries of "Terrible Nerf!" and such.

I... really like this. Huh.


Weird Tangential Anecdote Impossible to Apply to RPGs
In a weird way, it reminds me of a board game I once saw, where enemies were "Building" spells by assembling beginning, middle and end pieces, each of which interacted to form the overall spell. One of the tricky things was that each particular part had its own casting time - everything was still resolved in a single turn, but whoever had the lowest total casting time went got to go first, and have the chance to kill/disable their enemy before their enemy's spell even got off. You could also choose to only cast part of a spell - skip the middle part, or only cast the beginning, or whatever. The result would be much weaker, but would always go off before people cast an entire spell.

Anyway, I could see this system actually being applied pretty easily; mages can cast 1st-3rd level spells whenever they want, but can only cast 4th-6th level spells in the turn immediately after casting a 1st-3rd level, and can only cast 7th-9th level in the turn after casting a 4th-6th. For an added nerf, require the "Momentum" to come from the same school.

[Andezzar]

For an added nerf, require the "Momentum" to come from the same school.This would make sorcerers and other casters with a limited spell list even worse than they already are, some might even be incapable of casting certain high level spells, all can be made incapable of casting high level spells. Again something that penalizes casual players more than rule-savvy ones.

I'm thinking about going a different route: Roll initiative each round and subtract the desired spell level from the roll. Additionally have the players announce their intended actions in reverse order of initiative so that anyone with a greater initiative can interrupt them.

[TheDarkSaint]

I've always enjoyed tinkering around with the idea that magic is physically tiring. Not losing hitpoints or ability damage, but using the fatigue and exhaustion rules.


My rule of thumb is that they can cast X levels of day (X=1/2 Con + 1/2 Level) before they get fatigued. Once they go past double X, they go into exhausted.

Example: A 3rd level Wizard with 12 Constitution can cast up to 7 spell levels for free. Once he casts past his 7 levels, he is fatigued. Casting everything in a day won't actually fatigue him, which in my mind, is good for a 3rd level wizard. He's not slinging really powerful magic yet.

At 11th level, things change. We'll assume he's increased his Int up to 25 but hasn't gotten any Con gear yet. (silly, I know, but go with it)
He can cast a total of 11 levels before fatigue sets in. He can cast an additional 11 levels, or 22 in all before he is exhausted.

At 11th level, that's not really all that many spells if he is using lots of his 4th, 5th and 6ths. He is forced to decide it if it really worth it to tire himself out by casting these spells, or if he should wait.

Fatigue penalties aren't huge and characters would probably be willing to go into them, but exhausted is not somewhere anyone wants to be.

I feel this system gives some sense of balance. I make the fatigue and exhaustion immune to magic, as magical energy was the cause of it.

[Jeff the Green]

For an added nerf, require the "Momentum" to come from the same school.

I'm not sure how I feel about momentum in general, but I quite like this idea because it will hit Tier 1/2 casters much harder than Tier 3/4. Warmages and Dread Necromancers are barely affected, Beguilers are slightly more so, and sorcerers and wizards the most.

One thing I'd do, though, is allow you to sacrifice a spell-slot without casting to gain momentum, and make this momentum count for any school. That way you can still do social/sneaky spells without necessarily tipping your hand, and the fixed-list casters can still use their occasional out of specialty spells, like glibness on a beguiler or black tentacles on a dread necromancer.

[Belial_the_Leveler]

Here's what a munchkin wizard thinks about momentum;

I cast a Teleport or D-Door as soon as combat begins to get far enough away that it will take several rounds for the enemy to find me at least. 4th or 5th level spell, easily doable. Then I cast a Scrying or similar to keep an eye on the fight while I buff up. When I'm sufficiently buffed up and have, entirely safely, added up "momentum", I come back and own everything.

Hey, this is nice. The GM actually gives me a reason to abandon the dumb mundanes to eat the monster's best blows while I make myself safer, allow them to weaken the monster just enough so my save-or-die has 100% chance to blow it up and totally steal the spotlight. And the other players can't bitch about what I'd have done anyway because now it's totally the GM's fault.



In short, the wizard still owns everything. He only does it more safely and with a ready-made excuse to the rest of the party.

[GreenSerpent]

I've always enjoyed tinkering around with the idea that magic is physically tiring. Not losing hitpoints or ability damage, but using the fatigue and exhaustion rules.


My rule of thumb is that they can cast X levels of day (X=1/2 Con + 1/2 Level) before they get fatigued. Once they go past double X, they go into exhausted.

Example: A 3rd level Wizard with 12 Constitution can cast up to 7 spell levels for free. Once he casts past his 7 levels, he is fatigued. Casting everything in a day won't actually fatigue him, which in my mind, is good for a 3rd level wizard. He's not slinging really powerful magic yet.

At 11th level, things change. We'll assume he's increased his Int up to 25 but hasn't gotten any Con gear yet. (silly, I know, but go with it)
He can cast a total of 11 levels before fatigue sets in. He can cast an additional 11 levels, or 22 in all before he is exhausted.

At 11th level, that's not really all that many spells if he is using lots of his 4th, 5th and 6ths. He is forced to decide it if it really worth it to tire himself out by casting these spells, or if he should wait.

Fatigue penalties aren't huge and characters would probably be willing to go into them, but exhausted is not somewhere anyone wants to be.

I feel this system gives some sense of balance. I make the fatigue and exhaustion immune to magic, as magical energy was the cause of it.

This reminds me of Talislanta for some reason (used-to-be major rival to D&D, has a magic system that actually works pretty well, though green skin is practically normal).

As an extra bit, you could add on a line stating that spells used for crafting magic items do not count towards this limit. You could also have an "Even Deeper" power level where they take Ability Burn (CANNOT be healed by anything except natural rest).

[avr]

Here's what a munchkin wizard thinks about momentum;

I cast a Teleport or D-Door as soon as combat begins ...
Since this proposal is specifically about blocking that, the munchkin discovers that he has no idea how the world works and gets lessoned. You might like to apologise.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Here's what a munchkin wizard thinks about momentum;
A munchkin player will exploit things to hell and gone regardless of class or system, and no amount of rules will force a player to work with the group. But that's not who we're worried about. We're worried about the middle-competent person, who wants to play a wizard and contribute effectively without one-shotting the encounter, who accepts the rules of the game (stay in the group, no 15-minute adventuring days, no time-flow exploits, etc) but still wants to be able to pick non-blasty spells.

[avr]

The fact that you're sometimes hindering Bards and always hindering the Duskblade, Dread Necro and Beguiler (and Healer) who have 9th level spells makes it all the worse though.
Duskblades definitely don't get 9ths. 5th level max I believe? They get good mileage out of shocking grasp for a long while, I know that. They should be able to work well with momentum.
Dread Necro and Beguilers I think do outclass all the mundan-ish character classes you name in the next para.
Healers are natural NPCs.

Okay, but do they outclass Factotums? Not to any significant degree. How about Crusaders? Wildshape Rangers? Binders?

Nnnnnope. Is the intent of the change to stop T1s/T2s breaking the game? Is it to buff mundanes (why would you need to buff the Warblade?)? Is it to create a more even playing field?

Buff a class because the class needs a buff. Nerf a spell because a spell needs a nerf. Or ban a class if you're lazy about it. Hurting classes that don't need hurting solely because they derive their powers from a magical source instead of a mundane one doesn't make any sense to me.
I don't really agree with your Nnnnnope. Sans a 3.0e skill and silly tactics Factotums have real trouble holding their own in combat compared to the Bard; either's pretty good outside combat. Crusaders are seriously overrated since they may not be able to apply their favorite combo in the first or even second round of combat ... not completely unlike spellcasters under this proposal. I'd have to check into the exact capabilities of a Wildshape Ranger (not familiar right now) and Binders might have to have some sort of interaction with the momentum system, though I'm not sure what.

Your priorities are otherwise not mine.

So have him strike an Infernal Bargain with a Devil for magical powers. Or give him a template. Or something else entirely. Or just have him be a Wizard. You're the DM. Rule Zero exists for a reason.
Now that's lazy. And inconsistent.

[Amnestic]

Duskblades definitely don't get 9ths. 5th level max I believe?

My mistake. Never played one, had it in my head they were like Beguilers. And frankly it doesn't matter if momentum wouldn't affect them much, you're still stealing versatility away from them for no reason.


Dread Necro and Beguilers I think do outclass all the mundan-ish character classes you name in the next para.

Not to a degree sufficient enough to warrant them gaining a tier rank, clearly. Nor the Warmage, who does get 9ths, and is a tier below them. Ignore that class all you want "because you've never seen it" but it's still there, and people still play it.



Healers are natural NPCs.

Your point? People might still want to play them at some point.



I don't really agree with your Nnnnnope. Sans a 3.0e skill

With the Dragon Magazine #318 OA update, Iajutsu Focus is a 3.5 skill.



and silly tactics

Those being?



Your priorities are otherwise not mine.

You still haven't told me your aim. I asked you quite clearly - is it to buff mundanes? Is it to lower the power of Tier 1s and Tier 2s? Is it to punish spellcasters simply because you don't like them? What are you trying to accomplish?



Now that's lazy. And inconsistent.

I'm sorry, I thought you wanted the easy way out - what with your blanket nerfs to classes which don't need it solely because their abilities are called "Spells" instead of "Vestiges", "Maneuvers" or "Soulmelds".

Heck, Admiral Artificer over there is barely hurt by Momentum at all. You've curbed his power slightly, if at all. Nor does Momentum interact with the Binder (who with the online vestiges reach Tier 2 status).

[Belial_the_Leveler]

We're worried about the middle-competent person, who wants to play a wizard and contribute effectively without one-shotting the encounter, who accepts the rules of the game (stay in the group, no 15-minute adventuring days, no time-flow exploits, etc) but still wants to be able to pick non-blasty spells.
And this guy does not need momentum rules. He isn't the guy that will use twinned Celerity to one-shot the encounter in a single round. He isn't the guy that will search for every metamagic reduction technique that exists so that his enervations can deliver 16 negative levels each. He isn't the guy that searches for every DC-increasing method ever so he can pump out save-or-lose spells the enemy can't save against.

[Tysis]

3.5 already takes a huge gentlemen's agreement to play and mundanes are also capable of 'breaking' the game. Nerfs aren't really that necessary if the player understands this.

To me it seems like the op wanted more RP consequences then just straight nerfs to fullcasters. In that respect I really like how Dragon Age handled mages in that their minds were projected into the Fade(where demons reside) when they slept. Demons were attracted to them and would try to possess mages so they could wreak havoc in the world. With a bit of creativity I'm sure a similar scenario could be adapted to any setting.

[Flickerdart]

Let's make a hypothetical scenario.

Alice and Bob are novice players in different games. Alice is playing with regular caster rules, and makes a regular wizard - some magic missiles, a sprinkling of fireballs, and a couple of utility spells that just seem cool like invisibility and fly. This character is going to work rather well with a party of similar optimization levels playing just about any reasonable class.

Bob is playing with momentum rules. He picks the same spells, but realizes very quickly that the rules make him useless - in the first round he's stuck plinking for 5d4+5 damage with his magic missile instead of using level-appropriate abilities while his buddy the fighter is charging in lopping off heads. By the time he can use his powerful abilities, combat is already over! So Bob scours the internet for advice on how to make his level 1 and 2 spells real good, spends some downtime scribing spells, and comes in next session swinging with mitigated maximized empowered fell drain magic missile and glitterdust, plus planar binding minions outside of battle, because the only way he can be a useful member of the party is to make sure that he can squeeze out every bit of juice from what he's allowed to do, by picking the best spells and metamagic available to him. Bob wasn't a problem before, but he became a problem as soon as he was forced to optimize, because the optimization cap on even a nerfed wizard is still higher than on a normal fighter.

[Starbuck_II]

Bob is playing with momentum rules. He picks the same spells, but realizes very quickly that the rules make him useless - in the first round he's stuck plinking for 5d4+5 damage with his magic missile instead of using level-appropriate abilities while his buddy the fighter is charging in lopping off heads. By the time he can use his powerful abilities, combat is already over! So Bob scours the internet for advice on how to make his level 1 and 2 spells real good, spends some downtime scribing spells, and comes in next session swinging with mitigated maximized empowered fell drain magic missile and glitterdust, plus planar binding minions outside of battle, because the only way he can be a useful member of the party is to make sure that he can squeeze out every bit of juice from what he's allowed to do, by picking the best spells and metamagic available to him. Bob wasn't a problem before, but he became a problem as soon as he was forced to optimize, because the optimization cap on even a nerfed wizard is still higher than on a normal fighter.

Pretty sure we discussed metamagic counts as higher for momentum.
So he is still using magic missile before he can cast maximized empowered fell drain magic missile.

[Jeff the Green]

Pretty sure we discussed metamagic counts as higher for momentum.
So he is still using magic missile before he can cast maximized empowered fell drain magic missile.

This only means that now he's using metamagic reducers.

[Flickerdart]

Pretty sure we discussed metamagic counts as higher for momentum.
So he is still using magic missile before he can cast maximized empowered fell drain magic missile.
That's why I said mitigated.