PDA

View Full Version : Escalating Magic System (3.5), coauthored by AttilaTheGeek



eftexar
2013-05-19, 12:07 AM
FreakyCheeseMan started a thread, over here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=284184), where he is building a system for spellcasting. His won't, however, be for D&D, but are instead for his own system. If you've seen some of his other recent threads you know he has some pretty neat, and out of the box, ideas.

Here me and AttilaTheGeek will work on an idea I presented there. Here, I'll quote part my original post:


That gives me an idea. What if you have a mana limit that varies each round? Here's what I'm thinking:

For limiting spellcasting you could literally do a 'casting state,' where you have to enter a meditative state. Maintaining it requires a move action, for full caster's at least, each round and is subject to concentration. One round after this state has ended mana depletes at a rate of twice that it was gained per round.
Each round the spellcaster could build up lets say 1 mana per round (and up to 3 at higher levels). Our five levels of spells might cost 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9. If he is interrupted before his next turn comes he takes mental ability damage to his casting score equal to the amount of mana he would gain.
And, if you wanted to make magic more dangerous, the spellcaster could take un-mitigable non-lethal damage equal to the mana gained each round. Hmm... I might have to run with it myself.

Right know we are assuming that the original spells, within the Player's Handbook, will be used. I hope to have lots input from everyone.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Escalating Magic System

Basic Mechanics
Spellcasters will be limited to a maximum of 6th level spells. Higher level spells are too game-breaking and have been axed. Sorcerer's, Wizards, and other full casters gain access to new levels of spells, beyond first level spells, as indicated for the Bard and learn two spells, of any level(s) they can cast, per level.

A spellcaster can enter a state of focus, or exit it, as a free action. While in this state a spellcaster gains spells points each round equal to the lesser of his caster level or secondary modifier, plus the number of rounds previously in this state of focus. This total is cumulative.


Spells will cost points based on their level:

{table=head]Spell level|cost
0|0
1|1
2|3
3|6
4|10
5|15
6|21
[/table]

Every time you spend X spell points, where X is the greater of your secondary casting ability score or your level, you take a cumulative -2 penalty to your tertiary casting ability score and, if your tertiary casting stat isn't wisdom, a cumulative -1 penalty to will saves. Every round while you are no longer in a spellcasting state, 1 point of Wisdom penalty is removed.

{table=head]Primary casting stat|example|Secondary casting stat|Tertiary casting stat
Wisdom|Cleric|Charisma|Intelligence
Intelligence|Wizard|Wisdom|Charisma
Charisma|Sorcerer|Intelligence|Wisdom[/table]


Additional Actions

Accelerate Casting: As a standard action, you can heighten your spellcasting state, inflicting upon yourself a -2 penalty to your tertiary casting ability score and a -1 penalty to Will saves if that ability score is not wisdom. In exchange, your spellcasting state becomes more focused, and you gain 1 additional spell point each round as long as you remain in the spellcasting state.

Decelerate Casting:As a swift action, you can decrease your spellcasting focus, returning to your normal non-casting state. Diminishing casting restores a -2 penalty to your tertiary ability score and a -1 penalty to your Will save if that ability score is not wisdom. Your spellcasting state becomes less focused, and you gain 1 fewer spell point each round. You can activate this ability only when already in a spellcasting state.

eftexar
2013-05-19, 12:21 AM
I really like this effect from a gameplay point of view. How about this: At the beginning of each turn, the caster gains a number of "spell points" (or whatever) equal to half their casting ability score modifier plus two times the number of rounds they've been in combat. The five levels of spells cost 1, 3, 6, 10, and 15 points respectively (the triangular numbers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangular_number)).

For example, a 20th-level caster with a score of 32 in their casting stat has a modifier of +11, so they get 5 points per round plus two per round before. On round one they get 5 points, they open with a second-level spell (which costs 3) and leave 2 for next round. On round two, they get 7 points for a total of 9 and decide to spend 6 of them on a third-level spell, leaving 3. On the third round, they get 9 points for a total of 12, and cast a fourth-level spell for 10, leaving 2. Round four, they get 11 points and cast a fourth-level spell. They can't cast a fifth-level spell on round four because they've been casting the highest level spell they can each round, but they'll get 13 more points on round 5 and be able to then.

Alternatively, they could have been more sparing with their spells in the beginning of the fight to jump to higher-level spells at the end. For example, they gain 5 points the first round and spend 1 on a first-level spell, leaving 4 for when they gain 7 more on the second round and can spend 10 on a fourth-level spell. That leaves 1 for round four, when they gain 9 more and spend 10 on another fourth-level spell, and they get 11 more on round five, which leaves 1 when they cast another fourth-level spell.

That actually might work, though twice the number of rounds looks to be a little much. So half modifier + 1 per round of meditation. Then we plug in your costs.

Assuming a modifier of +4, at level 20, that would be, round by round, 2, 5, 9, 14, and 20.

Assuming a modifier of +8, at level 20, that would be, round by round, 4, 9, 15, 22, and 30.

I worry though that this could get too high. I think we either need a limit or non-lethal damage. I'm in preference of some sort of penalty. Then we could let players reset their meditation to avoid higher penalties (but lose the higher totals). What do you think?

AttilaTheGeek
2013-05-19, 10:47 AM
Hmm...

I thought about only increasing by one per round, but then you have a situation where at high levels it's changing by only 1/4 or 1/5 every round and the acceleration is super slow. In that scenario, the vast majority of points are from the casting ability score, not the casting state.

I just realized- if we're doing this for 3.5/PF, then there are nine spell levels. There's no reason to compress it to five, and having nine spell levels lets there be a smoother curve as a caster moves up the levels. However, the triangular numbers scale quadratically, so with that same pattern a 9th-level spell costs a whopping 45 spell points.

Here's a thing that might be useful, both for myself and for you.
Level|minimum casting stat|maximum
1|16|20
10|22|28
20|30|36

AttilaTheGeek
2013-05-19, 12:52 PM
What if we just said "on round X, you get (1/2*X*caster level) spell points"? I wanted it to scale with the ability score because it seemed more elegant, but this seems more simple and effective. So with spell costs like this:
{table=head]Spell level|cost
1|1
2|3
3|6
4|10
5|15
6|21
7|28
8|36
9|45[/table]

And the spell points gained each round:
{table=head]Caster level| CL 1|CL 5 | CL 10 | CL 15 | CL 20
Round 1|1|2|5|7|10
Round 2|2|4|10|15|20
Round 3|3|6|15|22|30
Round 4|4|8|20|30|40[/table]

Or total spell points gained throughout the entire fight:
{table=head]Caster level| CL 1| CL 5 | CL 10 | CL 15 | CL 20
Round 1|1|2|5|7|10
Round 2|3|6|15|22|30
Round 3|6|12|30|44|60
Round 4|10|20|50|74|100[/table]

Here are some example scenarios.

Say you're fifth level...{table=head]Round|Rollover points|Points gained|Total points|Spell cast (level, cost)|Remaining
Round 1|0|2|2|Magic Missile (1st-level, 1 point)|1
Round 2|1|4|5|Scorching Ray (2nd-level, 3 points)|2
Round 3|2|6|8|Fireball (3rd-level, 6 points)|2
Round 4|2|8|10|Fireball (3rd-level, 6 points)|4[/table]
and so on.

By 10th level, you have access to higher level spells and have a couple more options. Maybe you try and put out as much damage as you can, and so it looks like this:
{table=head]Round|Rollover points|Points gained|Total points|Spell cast (level, cost)|Remaining
Round 1|0|5|5|Scorching Ray (2nd-level, 3 points)|2
Round 2|2|10|12|Volcanic Storm (4th-level, 10 points)|2
Round 3|2|15|17|Cone of Cold (5th-level, 15 points)|2
Round 4|2|20|22|Cone of Cold again|7[/table]
This also reaches your highest level spell by the third round.

Hm. Upon further inspection, it may need some tweaking. With that 10th level example, you can use as many spells as you want and still reach 5th-level spells by round 3, but the only way to cast 5th-level spells on round 2 (instead of on round 3) is to cast a cantrip on round 1.

eftexar
2013-05-19, 02:28 PM
I wouldn't be against dropping the maximum spell level down to 7. That's still beyond the power of ToB. Plus it would keep our triangular numbers system in check. 28 isn't as extreme as 45.


Instead of doing double the round, or even just 1 per a round, we could add the # of the current round. Assuming a 7th level progression:
If we go half mod, + # of the current round, points at level 10, a modifier of +4, and a reduced 4th level spell access:

{table=head]Round|Rollover|Gain|Remain|Spell(level, cost)|Remaining
1st round |0|2| 2|Magic Missile (1st, 1 point)|1
2nd round|1|4| 5|Scorching Ray (2nd, 3 points)|2
3rd round|2|5| 7|Fireball (3rd, 6 points)|1
4th round|1|6| 7|Fireball (3rd, 6 points)|1
5th round|1|7| 8|Fireball (3rd, 6 points)|2
[/table]

You would never reach your highest level of spells, if you kept casting your maximum level of spells castable each round, anytime soon. But with these cast:

{table=head]Round|Rollover|Gain|Remain|Spell(level, cost)|Remaining
1st round |0|2| 2|Magic Missile (1st, 1 point)|1
2nd round|1|4| 5|Magic Missile (1st, 1 point)|4
3rd round|4|5| 9|Scorching Ray (2nd, 3 points)|4
4th round|4|6| 10|Volcanic Storm (4th, 10 points)|0
5th round|0|7| 7|Fireball (3rd, 5 points)|2
[/table]

AttilaTheGeek
2013-05-19, 02:54 PM
If we drop the maximum spell level down to seven, though, then we'd have to adjust spells known and spells per day for every casting class. I think it works much better if we keep it within the system.

eftexar
2013-05-19, 03:09 PM
I thought we were eliminating spells per day in favor of this system?

And we can easily approximate spells known, without a spell's known chart, with one of following progressions:

one new spell every level
one new spell every even level and two new spells every odd level
two new spells every level

AttilaTheGeek
2013-05-19, 03:33 PM
I thought we were eliminating spells per day in favor of this system?

Riiight.

What makes you say 7th-level, though? Why not 6th or 8th?

eftexar
2013-05-19, 03:51 PM
8th level I think is where spells start to get broken. The only broken spell that immediately comes to mind at 7th is limited wish. Plus it keeps the numbers perfectly in tune with the rest of the math.

Do you think 6 or 8th would be a better point? I definitely think 9th needs axed.

AttilaTheGeek
2013-05-19, 06:08 PM
I think 6th is a better cutoff. If 6th-level spells are the most powerful spells known to mankind, then Disintegrate is widely feared, Antimagic Fields are almost unheard of, Greater Dispel Magic takes the place of Disjunction, and Permanent and Programmed Image are the most mind-bending illusions. The biggest buffs are the Mass Animal's Stat line, teleports always risk being off-target, and Heal and Harm are the most powerful positive/negative energy spells.

If the cutoff is 7th level, then we get into some of the caster ridiculousness tricks. Wizards and Sorcerers get Create Lesser Demiplane, Forcecage, Mass Fly, Mage's Magnificent Mansion, and Plane Shift, while Clerics and Oracles can regenerate limbs, restore the dead, create their own demiplanes as well.

I think the mechanics you've hashed out work, but I dunno about having it scale off "half casting stat modifier". It creates bigger break points, where anything between an 14 and a 17 is almost the same, but at an 18 you suddenly get an extra spell point every round. What if we said "Your casting stat modifier, to a maximum of your level, plus one per previous round"? That way, a first-level character only gets 1, then 2, then 3, then 4, but the restriction doesn't have any effect above 4th or 5th level.

zabbarot
2013-05-19, 06:17 PM
What's the plan for casting outside of combat?

eftexar
2013-05-19, 06:28 PM
I can agree with 6th level spells. Traveling to other planes would now be a major plotpoint and it always bothered how the higher level teleportation made travel irrelevant.
We might even be fine leaving the other partial casters, such as the Bard and Paladin, with access to the same levels of spells since their lists are so limited.

But, other than that, basically just add the full modifier to points, but cap it at level? That would work and wouldn't really change the math enough to throw it off.

----------------------

We actually haven't discussed that yet zabbarot. It should probably be the next thing we figure out.

I think I'll consolidate what we have in the first thread if you think we're good, AttilaTheGeek, and then we can discuss how to deal with spells out of combat and what we want to do for penalties, if any, for remaining in the casting state for long periods of time.

Non-lethal damage would probably work, but the more I think about it the more I feel it is overused. We could do ability damage or temporary ability penalties, but that might be too harsh.

AttilaTheGeek
2013-05-19, 07:34 PM
I think I'll consolidate what we have in the first thread if you think we're good, AttilaTheGeek, and then we can discuss how to deal with spells out of combat and what we want to do for penalties, if any, for remaining in the casting state for long periods of time.

What do you mean by "the first thread"? FreakyCheeseMan's thread? Or this thread?

I do think there need to be penalties.


Non-lethal damage would probably work, but the more I think about it the more I feel it is overused. We could do ability damage or temporary ability penalties, but that might be too harsh.

As was pointed out, non-lethal damage really screws gishes over, and I don't think ability score is fun to deal with. What about fatigue and then exhaustion?

eftexar
2013-05-19, 07:40 PM
Sorry I mistyped. I meant to put everything we have here together in the first post so we don't have to reread half the posts to know what's going on.

Fatigue or exhaustion might work, but I feel that is too binary. It needs to stack over the course of several rounds. I'm thinking the first round probably doesn't have any penalties but each round after makes it worse.
I'd like to have something that can stack at least 4 times so it gets progressively worse till the fifth round. The last step could probably be unconsciousness.
Then we have to decide if we are going to allow a spellcaster to resist these penalties or if they have to end or 'reset' their point gathering.

AttilaTheGeek
2013-05-19, 08:21 PM
I don't think it should just be a function of how long you've been in that state, though. I just got this excellent idea:

For every X spell points you spend, where X is the greater of your casting stat modifier or your level, you take a -1 penalty to Dexterity. This penalty cannot reduce your Dexterity below 1, and each round you spend out of a spellcasting state, 1 point of Dexterity is restored.

It's elegant (spell points use the lesser, but this uses the greater), shows how more powerful mages are better at controlling their spellcasting, and gives a bigger penalty for more intense spellcasting states. I love it. :smallbiggrin:

eftexar
2013-05-19, 08:34 PM
I really like how the scaling works, but why dexterity? It's seems like this would punish gishes over full spellcasters. I would be more inclined to go with constitution or the stat that determines how many points are gained each round.

Wisdom might be a good stat to go with since most divine casters have more melee than equivalent arcane casters (it wouldn't be as punishing as an arcane caster's casting score).

AttilaTheGeek
2013-05-19, 09:10 PM
I really like how the scaling works, but why dexterity? It's seems like this would punish gishes over full spellcasters. I would be more inclined to go with constitution or the stat that determines how many points are gained each round.

Wisdom might be a good stat to go with since most divine casters have more melee than equivalent arcane casters (it wouldn't be as punishing as an arcane caster's casting score).

I chose dexterity because it represents being worn out or tired. When you're sleep-deprived, you lose hand-eye coordination, especially in the ability to aim (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0629.html). Wisdom could also work, but I don't want to particularly screw over divine casters. If the penalty is to constitution, then it punishes gishes even more than dexterity does, and if it's to the primary casting stat, then it cancels out the acceleration in spell points from being in a casting state at all.

In other words, you're right, it's not great at DEX, but any other penalty would be worse.

eftexar
2013-05-19, 09:19 PM
What if it penalized the score that goes to saving throw DCs? This would sort of represent the inability to properly control the spell because of the influx of energy.

Then we could determine the stat that brings in points based on the saving throw stat:

{table=head]Casting Modifier|Points Modifier
Charisma|Wisdom
Wisdom|Charisma
Intelligence|Wisdom
[/table]

This would make sense too since since divine casters would need to pray, and convince, their god to give them spells. Meanwhile arcane casters would need to gather mana, hence wisdom.

AttilaTheGeek
2013-05-19, 09:50 PM
What if it penalized the score that goes to saving throw DCs? This would sort of represent the inability to properly control the spell because of the influx of energy.

I like it. Anything that makes casters less SAD is good. I worry about a gish being too MAD (needing STR, CON, DC casting ability, points casting ability, and not a penalty in dex), but they won't be casting every round anyway so they can keep it to sort of a "low burn".


Then we could determine the stat that brings in points based on the saving throw stat:

I don't like that wisdom is over-represented and intelligence is not, but your decisions do make sense individually. What do you think of letting Charisma-based casters get spell points off INT because they're figuring out how to tap into their intrinsic magic more effectively?

eftexar
2013-05-19, 10:06 PM
Yeah I don't see why we couldn't explain it that way.

As far as gishes go though, unfortunately I'm not seeing an easy way to mitigate that problem without tons inelegant patches. The only thing that comes to mind is letting any arcane class "not subject to spell failure with light armor" resist the penalties easier.

AttilaTheGeek
2013-05-20, 05:19 AM
Yeah I don't see why we couldn't explain it that way.

Actually, after thinking about it some more, I think the right stat is just to hit Wisdom for everyone. From the fluff that's coming out of this, it doesn't really seem like it would make sense for divine casters to work this way. And what should be penalized for remaining in a heightened state of mental strain? Will saves. If you think DEX is better, we could say "penalty to dexterity and will saves", but it seems less elegant.


As far as gishes go though, unfortunately I'm not seeing an easy way to mitigate that problem without tons inelegant patches. The only thing that comes to mind is letting any arcane class "not subject to spell failure with light armor" resist the penalties easier.

Yeah, basically. :smallsigh:

eftexar
2013-05-20, 12:46 PM
So a hit to wisdom then? As a I said it shouldn't bother divine casters nearly as much as arcane.
The Cleric and Druid, for example, would have 15 BaB, sixth level spells, and some of the best abilities in core (turn undead, because of the feats it can open up, and wild shape). It hurts the Paladin, but that class was pretty bad to begin with so I'm not sure that says much.

It just occurred to me we could write up a form of mental fatigue, with 4 or 5 steps, that kind mimics the path of physical fatigue.
I'll throw something together and if it doesn't seem like it's headed in the right direction we can fall back to wisdom penalties. I think we should assume the dexterity penalty, below, doesn't stack with that from fatigue.

Tension
Negligible mental distress. A character with tension takes a -1 penalty to wisdom. Tension ends 1 hour after the condition that caused it ends.

Stress
Minor mental distress. A stressed character takes a -1 penalty to wisdom and dexterity. Stress ends 1 hour after the condition that caused it ends.

Strain
Moderate mental distress. A strained creature takes a -2 penalty to wisdom and dexterity. Strain ends 1 hour after the condition that caused it ends.

Overtax
Greater mental distress. An overtaxed creature takes a -6 penalty, to wisdom and dexterity, and is incapable of casting defensively. Overtaxed ends 30 minutes after the condition that caused it ends.

Burn Out
Severe mental distress. A creature who has burned out is no longer able to gather magic energy and suffers the penalties of being overtaxed. Burn out ends 10 minutes after the condition that caused it ends.
If a creature affected by Burn Out uses their remaining energy to cast additional spells they must succeed on a fortitude save, or fall unconscious, as soon as they complete the casting of it.

AttilaTheGeek
2013-05-20, 06:10 PM
I think the levels should be less discrete to make the progression of fatigue more smooth. Also... riiight. I, as a Pathfinder player, was just about to say "but doesn't the Paladin cast off Charisma?", which it does in PF. In general, when I homebrew, I try to make it compatible with both 3.5 and Pathfinder.

I think we should just stick with a Wisdom penalty; it seems simpler. If these penalties are going to become a part of every arcane caster's life, we may as well make it involve a minimum of memorization. I did like what you did with the burnout, though; maybe if it reduces your wisdom to 1 you just can't cast spells, period? I can see that being a really interesting gameplay decision. "How sure AM I that this spell, or the spell after it, can end the fight?"

I also think that multiple hours is far too long to recover from a casting state; if there are two difficult fights right after another, the mage would be hosed.

eftexar
2013-05-20, 06:32 PM
Hmm... I don't think it's that complicated, though I hadn't thought about the duration too thoroughly. It's no more complex than fatigue and some other conditions are.
Anyways, I would assume the condition track would be written down on your character sheet and would be memorized after a couple of sessions. It would be as simple as placing a small coin on your current condition to keep track.

I do like the idea of dropping wisdom to 1 and disabling casting though. Not only does it promote strategy, but it is a common trope in fantasy. I worry about ability damage a little bit when it's that low. Maybe 3 (if not already lower) so there is a bit of a buffer?

The progression I used was the same as for fatigue basically, though if you still think we should change it I will. Maybe start at a -2 and increase by -2 each time?

AttilaTheGeek
2013-05-20, 08:42 PM
I don't see why we need fatigue in stages. So you're saying the WIS penalties should be doubled? We could stand to do that, but I think we could do some testing.

eftexar
2013-05-20, 08:53 PM
I was fine with the penalties as they were, but you seemed against the progression I had.

I just feel like a vanilla ability penalty isn't enough. It knocks some numbers sure, but players notice more when penalties restrict their actions. And even with a penalty to DCs there are lots of spells that don't allow saving throws.

Besides, most other systems I've seen floating around have even more complex penalties than fatigue. One of the more complicated, xenotheurgy, is also one of the most fun.

AttilaTheGeek
2013-05-20, 09:18 PM
I was fine with the penalties as they were, but you seemed against the progression I had.

I just feel like a vanilla ability penalty isn't enough. It knocks some numbers sure, but players notice more when penalties restrict their actions. And even with a penalty to DCs there are lots of spells that don't allow saving throws.

Ooh, idea. How about this.
For a caster with any given primary casting stat...
{table=head]Primary casting stat|example|Secondary casting stat|Tertiary casting stat
Wisdom|Cleric|Charisma|Intelligence
Intelligence|Wizard|Wisdom|Charisma
Charisma|Sorcerer|Intelligence|Wisdom[/table]

Your primary stat determines your spell DCs, your secondary stat determines how many points you get in a round, and you can never spend more points than your tertiary ability score in one round. And the -1 penalties go to your tertiary stat. What was that about "penalties restricting actions"?

It also means casters only need one or two stats at low levels (like melee), but at high levels need all three.

eftexar
2013-05-21, 01:03 PM
That could definitely work. Simplifies things to. But would it be to unreasonable to assume mental scores of 18, 18, and 21 by level 15+ or so? That's my only concern.

AttilaTheGeek
2013-05-21, 03:02 PM
Definitely not. 15th level WBL (at least, in Pathfinder) is 240,000 gp, and a Headband of Physical Perfection +4 costs 64,000, or 77,000 to craft a headband of +6 to all the mental stats.

I also think it lets gives casters options: a caster who exclusively pumps their primary casting stat can toss out crazy DCs, a caster who gets bonuses to their secondary stat can ramp up more quickly and cast powerful spells early in the fight, and a caster who enhances their tertiary stat (at the cost of one of the others) can cast less potent spells for longer.

eftexar
2013-05-21, 03:37 PM
Agreed. I'm not used to factoring magic items, into my fixes, as I like to eliminate dependence on them, though that's not really as much of an issue for spellcasters as it is for other kinds of classes.

Now, as far as entering, or exiting, our state of meditation a swift action should probably work. Should we also allow them to 'reset' the rate of points gained as if they were back on the first round?

AttilaTheGeek
2013-05-21, 04:03 PM
Agreed. I'm not used to factoring magic items, into my fixes, as I like to eliminate dependence on them, though that's not really as much of an issue for spellcasters as it is for other kinds of classes.

Anything to make casters less SAD, right?


Now, as far as entering, or exiting, our state of meditation a swift action should probably work. Should we also allow them to 'reset' the rate of points gained as if they were back on the first round?

Why would a caster want to do that?

I did come up with another idea, though. It might involve a little too much arithmetic at the table, but let me know what you think. At any time, a caster's WIS penalty is equal two times the total number of spell points they've spent in the last three rounds divided by the greater of their level or tertiary spellcasting stat modifier. In other words, three rounds after they finish casting, they've spent 0 spell points in the last three rounds, so the penalties are 2*0/something, which cancels to 0. It also allows for different levels of intensity within one fight, letting a caster "tone down" and recuperate by casting lower level spells.

eftexar
2013-05-21, 04:44 PM
Reset you mean?

We hadn't determined a duration, so I wasn't sure how we plan to have the penalties fade or if they would go away when the casting state ended. If they go away fairly quickly a reset would be a good way to remove the penalties they have gained (at the cost of lower points).


But, I think your new thing would be too much math. We already have quite a bit here, even if most of it is simple, and I think we need to keep it down. Otherwise strategizing could become difficult to do on the fly.

AttilaTheGeek
2013-05-21, 05:39 PM
Reset you mean?

Yeah.


We hadn't determined a duration, so I wasn't sure how we plan to have the penalties fade or if they would go away when the casting state ended. If they go away fairly quickly a reset would be a good way to remove the penalties they have gained (at the cost of lower points).

What I had before just said "Every round after you exit a casting state, a -1 penalty is removed". Having an easy, action-free thing they can do to reset seems cheesy, like it's gaming the system to ignore the penalties.

Incidentally, I think the -1 penalty to the tertiary stat should be changed to "a -2 penalty to your tertiary casting stat, and if that stat is not Wisdom, an additional -1 penalty to Will saves". That way we don't have to hurt WIS casters even more but can still keep the will save penalties. I also suggested it be -2 instead of -1 because the penalty occurs roughly once every time you cast your highest-level spell, and it seems like it will be ignorable at -1.


But, I think your new thing would be too much math. We already have quite a bit here, even if most of it is simple, and I think we need to keep it down. Otherwise strategizing could become difficult to do on the fly.

Yeah, that's what I thought. Without counting what penalties accumulated when, though, there's no way to model switching from a "high burn" to a "slow burn" and back within the same combat. Unless...

What if we include actions to increase/reduce points per round and the penalties? At-will abilities, like this:


Accelerate Casting:As a standard action, you can heighten your spellcasting state, inflicting upon yourself a -2 penalty to your tertiary casting ability score and a -1 penalty to Will saves if that ability score is not wisdom. In exchange, your spellcasting state becomes more focused, and you gain 1 additional spell point each round as long as you remain in the spellcasting state.

And this:


Decelerate Casting:As a swift action, you can decrease your spellcasting focus, returning to your normal non-casting state. Diminishing casting restores a -2 penalty to your tertiary ability score and a -1 penalty to your Will save if that ability score is not wisdom. Your spellcasting state becomes less focused, and you gain 1 fewer spell point each round. You can activate this ability only when already in a spellcasting state.

which is its counterpart. Accelerate is a standard action because it lets you ramp up quickly, but decelerate is (as of now) a swift action because it would just be bad if you couldn't cast a spell in the same turn. It does kinda function as a reset, albeit a smaller one. Thoughts?

eftexar
2013-05-21, 07:22 PM
I think the Accelerate and Decelerate functions would be pretty handy, but I'm not so sure on changing penalties. Besides I thought we had decided to penalize the tertiary stat anyway?

AttilaTheGeek
2013-05-21, 08:15 PM
I think the Accelerate and Decelerate functions would be pretty handy, but I'm not so sure on changing penalties.

Well, since we already determined before that it makes sense to have a lowered Will save when you're in a spellcasting state, I just appended "and it also lowers your Will save if your tertiary stat isn't wisdom" (to avoid doubly penalizing people with Wisdom as their tertiary stat). Do you think we shouldn't?

Or were you referring to changing "-1" to "-2"?

eftexar
2013-05-22, 01:47 PM
My bad. I misunderstood what you had said. That would work better since modifiers are what is important. I think we can move on to the next issue.As far as adjusting spells per day, since we've capped things at 6th level spells, what do you think we should do?

I'm think it's probably fine to give full caster's the bard progression for spells per day. The spell lists for full casters are good enough they might make up for the the lack of class features. The Wizard, Cleric, and Druid at least wouldn't see too much of a dent, though the Sorcerer might be hurting a bit.

AttilaTheGeek
2013-05-22, 02:28 PM
As far as adjusting spells per day, since we've capped things at 6th level spells, what do you think we should do?


I thought we were eliminating spells per day in favor of this system?

I don't see why we need to limit it.

AttilaTheGeek
2013-05-22, 04:38 PM
I was thinking some more, and I realized it didn't make sense for energy to carry over, letting casters cast a bunch of low-level spells to jump straight to the big ones. Sure, it makes for interesting tactical decisions, but it doesn't seem to fit the fluff. I'm gonna toss another idea out, which, after reviewing it, I think is awesome.

On any given round, a caster receives spell points equal to the average number of spell points they've spent in the last four rounds. The penalty to the tertiary casting stat for this round is equal to the number of spell points you gained this round. Accelerate just says "gain spell points equal to your secondary casting stat" and is a swift action, and Decelerate says "you lose that many points".

It's elegant, no? At a high burn, you're spending a lot of points, gaining a lot of points, and taking heavy penalties. At a low burn, they're all lessened, and you can switch between high and low burns (and everywhere in between) by moving up the spell levels. All the penalties go away four rounds after you stop casting. It also means that, whenever you cast a big spell, or any spell, you'll get the points back in four rounds, so you only go "empty" when you try to ramp up too quickly from low- to high-level spells. What do you think?

eftexar
2013-05-22, 06:59 PM
I don't know. I kind of liked where we were headed already. And I don't see how it doesn't makes sense. The longer our spellcaster tries to gather magic the more he can draw in, but the more dangerous it becomes. There is also the issue of out of combat spells. It feels like it would be harder to place limits on them with your new suggestion.

As far as spellcasting though, since we've limited to 6th level spells, what progression should we use for gaining them. I don't know why I said spells per day, I meant what levels the spells were gained and how to deal with casters that were previously half casters.

AttilaTheGeek
2013-05-22, 07:26 PM
I don't know. I kind of liked where we were headed already. And I don't see how it doesn't makes sense. The longer our spellcaster tries to gather magic the more he can draw in, but the more dangerous it becomes.

I just feel like it makes more sense, you know? It means you have to actually work your way up the spell levels, whereas in the version we had before a caster could jump to higher spell levelsbecause he used cheaper spells before. I feel like this version makes more sense because there are different levels of being attuned, and it's represented by how intense the spellcasting state is.


There is also the issue of out of combat spells. It feels like it would be harder to place limits on them with your new suggestion.

In what way?

What we had before makes more tactical combats in the 3-5 round duration, you're right. But for very long combats, I really like this new idea. Maybe we can combine them?

eftexar
2013-05-23, 09:34 PM
I think things will get too complicated if we combine them. And it just seems odd to me that you would gain spell points based on how many you spent the previous round(s).

AttilaTheGeek
2013-05-23, 09:35 PM
I think things will get too complicated if we combine them. And it just seems odd to me that you would gain spell points based on how many you spent the previous round(s).

Sure. Maybe I'll bring that back as something else later, who knows. Or FreakyCheese will use it. *shrug*.

So, uh, what else were we working on? Is it ready for a writeup and playtesting?

eftexar
2013-05-23, 10:05 PM
Yeah, I would say it's ready. I can can combine and write everything up in the first post tomorrow.

I think for ease of playtest we should use the Bard progression, for what point new level of spells are accessed, and 2 spells per level.

AttilaTheGeek
2013-05-24, 07:56 PM
I think for ease of playtest we should use the Bard progression, for what point new level of spells are accessed, and 2 spells per level.

Why not use the bard spell progression for spells known?

eftexar
2013-05-24, 07:59 PM
We could. I was just going with what the Wizard had.

AttilaTheGeek
2013-05-24, 08:01 PM
Actually, examining the bard spell list, a bard learns less than two spells per level. So yeah, any two spells of levels they can cast sounds good.

AttilaTheGeek
2013-05-25, 12:09 PM
A couple quick things about formatting.

Can you edit the table of spell point costs to include that cantrips are free?

There are also some typos in the opening couple paragraphs and things that I think should be changed.


"Spellcasters (no apostrophe) will be limited to a maximum of 6th-level (hyphenated) spells. Higher level spells are too game-breaking (hyphenated) and have been axed. For the purpose of playtesting, with a Sorcerers (plural), Wizards and other full casters gain, assume access to new levels of spells, beyond first, as indicated for the Bard and 2 spells learned learn two spells of a level they can cast per each level.

As a A spellcaster you can enter or exit a state of meditation, or exit it, as a swift action. While in this state you a spellcaster gains spell points each round equal to the lesser of your his caster level or your secondary ability score modifier, plus the number of rounds you were previously in this state. For example, a spellcaster with a +3 secondary ability score modifier gains 3 spell points on the first round, 4 on the second, 5 on the third, and so on. This total is cumulative."

Bold means add, strikethrough means remove. The things in blue I have comments on.

Do you think "meditation" is the best word? What about "arcane focus" because it seems more apt for combat, or "spellcasting state" because it introduces terminology? Also, why is entering a swift action? All that does is deny casters their swift action on the first round of combat. Is there any reason why it shouldn't be a free action?

eftexar
2013-05-25, 02:26 PM
Reworded the text, changing entering focus to a free action, and added cantrips.