a magic question

[blelliot]

What does the playground think if a DM was to run a game where 5th level spells were the most powerful spells one could find? What kind of effects would that have on gameplay? What monsters that would never be worth an afterthought before, suddenly become quite viable threats? Let me know what all of you think. I'm still working on this lower magic setting so I need some feedback on this idea. Thanks everyone!

[Alleran]

Does that include monsters who have access to those higher-level spells as spell-like abilities?

[Lord Haart]

Does that include ending a campaign before any character (ninth-circle-at-leve-1 cheese nonwithstanding, but including fast progression possibilities) could possibly get sixth-circle or higher spells?

[Anonymouswizard]

For the world it depends on the word-building. In my world most people are unable to advance past level 12, and the majority of people don't reach 7th level (most archmages are level 8-10, with the exception of one country where they are generally level 10-11 due to a higher population), which limits spells available to all 1-3 level, most level 4-5 spells, and then level 6-9 are available on an individual basis, but most monsters aren't a threat because of large organised countries, including one that arms it's soldier'd with staffs including several powerful 5th level spells (where a party of four 9th level adventurers may have trouble with a monster, a couple of squads of 4th level soldiers coordinating SoD/SoL/SoS spells launched from staffs can take down. The main exception is monsters like high CR dragons and outsiders, who do have access to spells about 5th level.

On an adventuring front it depends entirely on how the monster is played. I don't have any experience running monsters of the sort of power level, but I assume that it changes so that a dragon (for example) is someone who you organise a dragon to fight instead of facing head on. For my group I would probably stop using all monsters 3 or more levels above the party level unless I wanted a 'hopeless' fight. For another they may be able to tackle CRs 5-8 levels above theirs, while another may get stuck when facing those of a CR greater than 10.

[blelliot]

Does that include monsters who have access to those higher-level spells as spell-like abilities?

Yes, I will need to go through all the monster books I plan on using and weeding out the ones that wont fit

Does that include ending a campaign before any character (ninth-circle-at-leve-1 cheese nonwithstanding, but including fast progression possibilities) could possibly get sixth-circle or higher spells?
Actually the spellcasting class (click here to see it: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=297471)Has the spell progression of the adept npc class, so the player gets @nd level spells at 4th, 3rd spells at 8th, 4th spells at 12th, and 5th spells at 16th, the plan is to use a combination of epic spellcasting and improved spell capacity for 6th through 9th level spells.

[Yora]

As long as the PCs stay under 10th level, it shouldn't really change much at all. Many of the spells that make a meaningful difference are 5th level spells, like raise dead, plane shift, break enchantment, contact other plane, sending, overland flight, and passwall. The spells that are 6th level and lower generally are simply more powerful versions, but there aren't any drastically new things that can be done that are not possible by 5th and lower level spells.
Limiting spells to 4th level would have a rather bigger impact.

[blelliot]

Many of the spells that make a meaningful difference are 5th level spells, like raise dead, plane shift, break enchantment, contact other plane, sending, overland flight, and passwall.

Thats why I chose 5th level spells to be the max a charachter could recieve. And they dont get them until 16th level

[Yora]

Now that makes quite a major dent, especially when characters of that level are very rare.

[Ultimate_Coffee]

It seems like your plan is to limit the spellcasting capability of all people in your world. This would include the PCs I imagine...
For a world concept, I can see how this is a good idea. But to enforce this rule on the players seems pretty unfair to spellcasting classes. Are you going to drop the Rogue's SA dice or take away some of the fighter's feats?
The only thing a spellcaster gets is spellcasting. I think that weakening that would make the prospect of playing a spellcaster much less appealing.
That is simply my opinion however.

[Greenish]

For a world concept, I can see how this is a good idea. But to enforce this rule on the players seems pretty unfair to spellcasting classes. Are you going to drop the Rogue's SA dice or take away some of the fighter's feats?You seem to be assuming that spellcasters are about as powerful as fighters or rogues. Many would disagree.

[Ultimate_Coffee]

You seem to be assuming that spellcasters are about as powerful as fighters or rogues. Many would disagree.

I have to say that an optimized spellcaster is much stronger than an optimized rogue. An optimized fighter or barbarian can still hold thier weight pretty well...
In any case, I am refering to non-optimized play, where a normal spellcaster is going to do some fun support and an occasional AOE. To cut that back really cuts down on the fun of playing a spellcaster in my opinion.
I guess it depends a lot on who your players are...

[Lafaellar]

Well, spellcasters in this world will have to find another focus for them as dealing damage with spells is no longer very attractive so I assume spellcasters in this world will be more like mystics and less "bam fireball".

Still, being the only one in the party able to cast healing spells gives you a certain amount of "power" and certain utility spells will be more attractive as the defense mechanisms are equally hard to come by.

Generally I assume legends in this world will be more about mighty warriors or deft assassins than mighty wizards.
If everyone on the table is okay with this, why not?

But yes, the combat output of fighter and rogue types will increase strongly in comparison to spellcasters. Practically, a 16th level spellcaster in this world is comparable to a 9th level wizard or cleric.

This will of course mean, that certain monsters will be much more powerful in comparison. At level 16 you usually have 8th level spells available so your party is missing on 3 levels of spells.

If you where to cap the level at 10 however you would create a wholly different scenario because you would simply reduce the power level of the whole world but this way you change how the power of a caster interacts with the world as a whole as he will always be lacking behind what is expected by standard D&D.

So not really sure what advise to give you, if that is what you want, go for it.

[blelliot]

Does anyone think that the base class I created couldn't stand as the spellcasting class for my new world? I plan on using the barbarian, fighter, knight, marshall, rogue, and scout as the other base classes. Does the mystic adept mesh well with these classes?