Potential House Rule: Caster Vulnerability to...

[Maginomicon]

I'm toying with the possibility of making casters have a blanket vulnerability to fatigue and exhaustion. What I mean by that is all casters by having significant access to spells intrinsically are vulnerable to fatigue and exhaustion, and any creature type/subtype, race, character option, spell/power, extraordinary ability, item, etc. that would normally grant blanket immunity to fatigue or exhaustion no longer works against fatigue or exhaustion specifically (when applied to a caster).

That might not seem like a lot, but here's the other side of the coin (the first part is just what makes this other half possible): All casters that are fatigued or exhausted for the standard duration (that being, an effect that causes it "as the status condition" for the status condition's normal duration) or a conditional duration (such as dehydration or frostbite) but not a stated duration (such as Ray of Exhaustion or Touch of Fatigue, which have duration expressed in rounds/minutes/etc.) has a severe nerf applied to their casting ability so long as they're fatigued or exhausted. To be clear, any fatigue or exhaustion effect which goes away after a specified number of rounds/minutes/etc. does not trigger this nerf.

Specifically, the nerf would be to cause a caster to very temporarily (an hour for exhaustion or until a daily rest for fatigue) lose access to some flat percentage of their spell slots (50% locked-out for fatigue, 75% locked-out for exhaustion; don't ask about the math involved, suffice to say the math makes sense in context).

How this would affect battle dynamic "in theory" is that most casters would probably keep available some kind of spell that can cause this nerf to other casters (such as sunstroke) at all times. Fort saves are the usual save against those kinds of spells, so casters are usually weak to it anyway. Likewise, casters would be worrying a lot about being hit by this effect and so would adopt defenses to prevent it (such as boosting their fort save, preventing the attack from connecting somehow, and spell resistance).

What I want to know is... what kinds of dynamic might this cause players or NPCs to adopt other than the above?

There don't appear to be any unavoidable items, spells, or effects (that my searching has uncovered) that a low-level player or NPC has access to which cause fatigue or exhaustion with no save, a high save DC, or otherwise can't be stopped by a defensive score of some kind. Thus, I probably don't have to worry about casters being unavoidably locked-down by low-level encounters/PCs (although I could be wrong, please inform me if there's something like a splash weapon or poison that causes those conditions as stated above).

[rockdeworld]

I don't think this will change the game, or even come into play, at all. Waves of Fatigue are the only sure-fire way I can think of to force the players' characters to be fatigued, or heavily hitting them with environment at low levels. Moreover, what's the reason for this change?

[Maginomicon]

Moreover, what's the reason for this change?In a nutshell, to give spellcasters a blanket vulnerability that (and I'm oversimplifying my explanation here) makes sense for "nerds" to have and causes temporary caster lockdown that isn't as severe as antimagic field (which is essentially the GM giving the middle-finger to casters) or as piddly as mana flux, deafness, or arcane spell failure.

[Amnestic]

In a nutshell, to give spellcasters a blanket vulnerability that (and I'm oversimplifying my explanation here) makes sense for "nerds"

Sorcerers? Bards? Dread Necromancers? Beguilers? Warmages? Druids? Rangers?

None of the above are 'nerds'.


and causes temporary caster lockdown that isn't as severe as antimagic field (which is essentially the GM giving the middle-finger to casters) or as piddly as mana flux, deafness, or arcane spell failure.

Why're you nerfing the caster classes that don't need to be nerfed? Why're you targeting every caster (including those wizards who aren't even breaking the game) when, presumably, it's only the problem ones causing you trouble?

[Morbis Meh]

snip~

Essentially a useless nerf that would basically make anyone who wanted to play a caster not want to play a caster. If you are having problems with casters then fix/ban the spells that are broken and don't make the classes unplayable. All this nerf does is give a random and exceptionally harsh nerf to classes that don't need it (people have already stated them). This also encourages DM vs players mentality which imp is wrong everyone is there to play a game and have fun not compete or confront one another.

[Maginomicon]

Sorcerers? Bards? Dread Necromancers? Beguilers? Warmages? Druids? Rangers?

None of the above are 'nerds'.I called it an "oversimplification" for a reason. Even for those classes, you just know they got picked on in school.

Why're you nerfing the caster classes that don't need to be nerfed? Why're you targeting every caster (including those wizards who aren't even breaking the game) when, presumably, it's only the problem ones causing you trouble?Again, oversimplifying here, but it's either that or use sanity rules (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/campaigns/sanity.htm). Something's got to give. Hell, entirely by coincidence, the Healer class has significantly more spellcasting ability at first level than a Wizard.

It's bizarre, but that's just the way it turned out.


Essentially a useless nerf that would basically make anyone who wanted to play a caster not want to play a caster. If you are having problems with casters then fix/ban the spells that are broken and don't make the classes unplayable. All this nerf does is give a random and exceptionally harsh nerf to classes that don't need it (people have already stated them). This also encourages DM vs players mentality which imp is wrong everyone is there to play a game and have fun not compete or confront one another.Seriously, stop whining about the premise (it's not going to change) and start answering the damn questions presented in the OP. I don't want to know what you personally think of the house rule (again, it's not going to change). I just want to know what you think will actually happen when the house rule is actually in play, even in the hands of TO.

I am soooo sick of people around here *****ing about the premise instead of honestly answering the question(s).

[The Viscount]

It honestly wouldn't change too much, as there aren't too many things that impose durationless fatigue. Waves of fatigue becomes a cool anti-caster spell. What few multiclass barbarian/casters existed will no longer go that route.

[Karnith]

It honestly wouldn't change too much, as there aren't too many things that impose durationless fatigue. Waves of fatigue becomes a cool anti-caster spell. What few multiclass barbarian/casters existed will no longer go that route.
I will echo this and the general sentiment in the thread that this won't change much of anything; casters have a new way of screwing each other over, but durationless fatigue is rare as a combat effect (and pretty much only available to casters), so unless you (as a DM) throw a bunch of fatigue-inducing situations at the players, I would not expect it to have a noticeable impact on game balance (or anything else, really).

[Eldonauran]

So, you want a spell fatigue system. I am not against such a thing in certain settings. I embrace the idea that spellcasting is a bit draining and spellcasters would be adverse to unleashing their full storehouse of spells unless it was absolutely necessary (ie, going nova).

In all, it would make spellcasters more careful about how and when to use their magic. I think an automatic concentration check would be necessary to cast spells when 'spell fatigued', as the user is fighting against his limitations. The check should probably not be able to be used as part of fighting defensively, or if allowed, a much higher increase in DC (though, I'd drop the loss of the spell on a failure).


I am soooo sick of people around here *****ing about the premise instead of honestly answering the question(s).
:smallamused: Sassy. I like you.

[Maginomicon]

So, you want a spell fatigue system. I am not against such a thing in certain settings. I embrace the idea that spellcasting is a bit draining and spellcasters would be adverse to unleashing their full storehouse of spells unless it was absolutely necessary (ie, going nova).This isn't actually what I was going for, but you're close (see below).


In all, it would make spellcasters more careful about how and when to use their magic. I think an automatic concentration check would be necessary to cast spells when 'spell fatigued', as the user is fighting against his limitations. The check should probably not be able to be used as part of fighting defensively, or if allowed, a much higher increase in DC (though, I'd drop the loss of the spell on a failure).I also have this thing along-side it as a separate house rule that I call "Spell Burn" that among other things forces a concentration check when you begin casting in any circumstances (separate from and rolled before all other concentration checks for casting). Usually, you'll auto-succeed on the check, but if you have enough Spell Burn... :smallamused:

(You can only get Spell Burn in certain specific but very tempting situations.)


:smallamused: Sassy. I like you.Not sure if sarcastic or just admiration. :smallwink:

[ahenobarbi]

Seriously, stop whining about the premise (it's not going to change) and start answering the damn questions presented in the OP. I don't want to know what you personally think of the house rule (again, it's not going to change). I just want to know what you think will actually happen when the house rule is actually in play, even in the hands of TO.

I am soooo sick of people around here *****ing about the premise instead of honestly answering the question(s).

But other posters did that, they answered your question (in case you missed it: it drive away reasonable players from playing casters. Game-breaking casters don't really notice the change).

Also please keep the discussion polite.

[Maginomicon]

But other posters did that, they answered your question (in case you missed it: it drive away reasonable players from playing casters. Game-breaking casters don't really notice the change).

Also please keep the discussion polite.
Saying "people won't want to play ______ in your game" isn't a valid answer to the question of "how will it affect player/NPC dynamic in-game". It's a cop-out (as it's an out-of-game answer to an in-game question).

I don't tolerate cop-outs when I'm looking for answers.

[Eldonauran]

This isn't actually what I was going for, but you're close (see below).

I also have this thing along-side it as a separate house rule that I call "Spell Burn" that among other things forces a concentration check when you begin casting in any circumstances (separate from and rolled before all other concentration checks for casting). Usually, you'll auto-succeed on the check, but if you have enough Spell Burn... :smallamused:

(You can only get Spell Burn in certain specific but very tempting situations.)
I still like the idea. I am a fan of drawbacks of magic. People not wanting to play spellcasters because its harder or more dangerous, or even more 'work' than before, that doesn't phase me. Mudane should be easier, that's why everyone can do it (usually).


Not sure if sarcastic or just admiration. :smallwink: Little bit of the first, mostly the last. I tend to enjoy seeing someone stand up and tell everyone to shut it and focus on the question, not their personal feelings. Its what happens in adult conversations when things get sidetracked.

[ahenobarbi]

Saying "people won't want to play ______ in your game" isn't a valid answer to the question of "how will it affect player/NPC dynamic in-game". It's a cop-out (as it's an out-of-game answer to an in-game question).

Yes it is. If you really didn't get it I'll try rephrasing:

It will have virtually no in-game effect. However most likely it will have out=of-game side effect of annoying some players.


I don't tolerate cop-outs when I'm looking for answers.

Good thing you have no power over here.


I tend to enjoy seeing someone stand up and tell everyone to shut it and focus on the question, not their personal feelings. Its what happens in adult conversations when things get sidetracked.

You do know you're the only person in this thread not posting on-topic?

[SethoMarkus]

If it is assumed that this is how casters have always been in the setting, then I would figure that there would be more fatigue and exhaustion causing spells as well as more spells to counter/defend against fatigue/exhaustion and recover from such states. All-in-all, I doubt it would really change the game at all, as it is no different than throwing SR, counterspell, or Dispel Magic around.

Actually, even without homebrew spells, there are plenty of ways to avoid or heal fatigue/exhaustion, such as the Restoration spell or Sandals of the Vagabond (Complete Champion), which bumps all exhaustion effects down to fatigued.

Really, it would just be another element for casters to prepare for, without actually hurting them any. I would see it harming quasi-casters, like Ranger and Paladin, more than full casters.

[Eldonauran]

You do know you're the only person in this thread not posting on-topic?

First post I made was on topic, second post was to clarify something the OP asked about that first post. Why do you feel the need to nitpick?

As for Maginomicon, can you share any specific mechanics on how this fatigue system will work? I am pretty good at eyeballing mechanics and seeing where the problems might crop up in gameplay.

So that we can stay focused on your specific question:

What I want to know is... what kinds of dynamic might this cause players or NPCs to adopt other than the above?
Players would attempt to avoid situations in which they would be exposed to the fatigue. Increasing Fort saves, increased attempts at getting spell resistance, developing/researching spells that would grant them a bonus to this new type of fatigue. We would probably see a little less gish-ing and a bit more long ranged magic.

[Morbis Meh]

Seriously, stop whining about the premise (it's not going to change) and start answering the damn questions presented in the OP. I don't want to know what you personally think of the house rule (again, it's not going to change). I just want to know what you think will actually happen when the house rule is actually in play, even in the hands of TO.

I am soooo sick of people around here *****ing about the premise instead of honestly answering the question(s).

I did answer the question you just chose to ignore it whether it is viewed as a cop out or not; however, you sir need to cool down and stop being so rude. I could care less as to whether it is going to go away or not because it WILL result in the answer I have given; players getting punished for picking a class will stop playing the class if you want to be adversarial towards your players for picking certain classes just outright ban the dang class. This nerf won't do spit unless the DM decides to abuse the nerf over and over again. You may as well just stick with destroying the wizards spellbook/cleric's holy symbol if you want to harm casters. So all in all a completely redundant nerf (antimagic fields barely affect wizards that no what they're doing) that has the ability to create a hostile environment.

[mattie_p]

Are you going to eliminate immunity to the dazed condition while you are at it? Celerity is a thing.

[Roguenewb]

Put a fort save on every spellcast? I dunno, maybe 10+2xSpell level? Whenever fatigued, -2 to spellcasting stat. Escalates to exhausted with no casting allowed? Don't make them lose the spell slot that causes the fatigue or exhaustion. Rename these effects into Resonance and Backlash (instead of fatigue and exhaustion) so that no currently exist magic effect can shield the casters (gotta stop the splatbook creep) and go from there. Seems like *a* fix. Don't know if it's the best, but it'll probably work. Give Sorcs and Favored Souls a +2 on the save, natural vitality and all that. Give the focused casters (Beguilers, Warmages, Dread Necros) a +4 on the save, focused training. Suddenly less powerful casters are more attractive. It will make CoD even more powerful cause they get fort saves.

[Sith_Happens]

A small handful of necromancy spells get a lot more fun, but besides that I don't think this rule would even be noticeable the vast majority of the time.

[eggynack]

It'd keep the dynamics of the game roughly identical to how they are now. As has been noted, the only kindsa folks that can apply this kind of debuff with any frequency are casters. Casters could already stop casters, and this just makes it so that they're better at it. What you end up doing is making caster versus caster battles even more of an initiative contest. Not really though, because if you're a wizard acting first, you'd probably rather just kill your opponent, rather than applying weird long term debuffs. You're basically just altering the dynamics between a character type and itself, which implies that there is no change to the game. Just like almost every other option to stop casters, this is one that can only really be used by casters.

[Psyren]

I called it an "oversimplification" for a reason. Even for those classes, you just know they got picked on in school.

Bards and Sorcerers were the ones that cruised through class with Cs and got laid.

[TuggyNE]

I'm toying with the possibility of making casters have a blanket vulnerability to fatigue and exhaustion. What I mean by that is all casters by having significant access to spells intrinsically are vulnerable to fatigue and exhaustion, and any creature type/subtype, race, character option, spell/power, extraordinary ability, item, etc. that would normally grant blanket immunity to fatigue or exhaustion no longer works against fatigue or exhaustion specifically (when applied to a caster).

I'm never really a fan of fiated "oh, your race loses such-and-such an ability, that all other members have, because you had the temerity to pick a particular metagame expression of your character's abilities". However, it's possible that you could make this work almost acceptably; for example, full casters turn immunity into a +4 bonus to saves, 2/3 casters turn it into a +8 bonus, and half casters retain immunity.

(I'm sorry, but even allowing for the grossly anachronistic nerd/school analogy, Rangers and Paladins are much closer to jocks or survivalist nuts than nerds. Making a Ranger, of all people, unable to benefit from immunity to fatigue is simply absurd.)


How this would affect battle dynamic "in theory" is that most casters would probably keep available some kind of spell that can cause this nerf to other casters (such as sunstroke) at all times. Fort saves are the usual save against those kinds of spells, so casters are usually weak to it anyway. Likewise, casters would be worrying a lot about being hit by this effect and so would adopt defenses to prevent it (such as boosting their fort save, preventing the attack from connecting somehow, and spell resistance).

What I want to know is... what kinds of dynamic might this cause players or NPCs to adopt other than the above?

Well, besides the drop in utility of the various options for fatigue/exhaustion immunity, and the rise in power of fatigue/exhaustion spells, I'm not sure there would be much of a difference. Obviously, items and spells to recover from those conditions would be a necessity for mid- to high-level casters.

However, this nerf doesn't affect much most of the time, so it doesn't substantially alter the normal state; it just makes harsher debuffs more available, mostly to non-mundanes, so it increases rocket-tagginess.


Saying "people won't want to play ______ in your game" isn't a valid answer to the question of "how will it affect player/NPC dynamic in-game". It's a cop-out (as it's an out-of-game answer to an in-game question).

There's an interesting quirk of people who volunteer answers about technical issues: they tend to volunteer answers about questions you weren't sure you needed to ask, or assumed were obvious, and they aren't necessarily willing to take your assertion that of course you already have everything handled except for one little area — not, that is, unless you actually demonstrate all the things you've thought of. This is mostly because they're smart people, well aware (at least on an intuitive level) that unknown unknowns can be quite good at tripping up the unwary, and they also tend to question everything. Otherwise they likely wouldn't have anything useful to say!

Hopefully this bit of unasked-for poster psychology will prove of assistance in the future. :smallwink:

[Bakkan]

I would imagine that a lot of caster types would simply pick up a wand or command word item of lesser resoration and then forget about the mechanic until it came up. That's probably what I would do.