Adjustment to the PF magic system help

[TheOneHawk]

Hey everyone! Something that has always irritated me about magic is its dependability. It seems really odd that wizards never ever **** up, even the first time they cast a spell. So I've been mulling over a way to work in a spell casting roll.

Basically, the idea I have is that casting a spell requires a check against dc 10 plus spell level x2. You get a bonus to the roll based on your casting stat and you can get bonuses to casting specific schools by selecting them as your favoured school and maybe some kind of skill point like system as you level up? I'm not a balance mastermind so I don't know how to make the roll into a thing that is non trivial but doesn't completely murder casting.

As a side point, I would really like to bring in a miscast table for rolling a mat 1 then confirming the crit fail by failing the roll again. I'm planning on making this a d100 so any random magic went wrong ideas would be appreciated to plug in.

Basically I'm looking for how to make casting a bit less reliable, more risky, but I don't know how hard it should be. Any advice would be appreciated, also if anyone has good ideas for fitting feats, that would be a plus.

Thanks so much!

[Jayabalard]

Quite a number of people really seem to dislike critical fails in general.

In GURPS (yes, it's a totally different game than D&D) magic is resolved like any other skill, and can critically fail*. Most of the failure effects are embarrassing or inconvenient (Spell produces nothing but a loud noise and a flash of colored light) though there are some that are deadly (A demon appears and attacks the caster).

Steve Jackson games has the quick version of their rules (http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/lite/3e/gurpslite.pdf) online, but it looks like that doesn't include the table, so I don't think it's appropriate to copy it in it's entirety... but some general ideas would be

wrong target
reverse effect, right target
illusion rather than real effect
some other totally useless effect
you injure yourself waving your arms around to cast


*how often someone fails depends on effective skill:

if your skill is 16 or higher, then it winds up being 0.5% of the time
if your skill is under 16, then it's 2% of the time
if your skill is 6 or lower (which is very very low) it'll be more often


And there are various things that you can do to increase your effective skill (taking extra time to cast, for example)

[TheOneHawk]

Crit fails make minimal sense regarding materials. Magic, however, seems like it should be more dangerous and less controlled. The payoff is already there, but where is the risk?

I like the idea of taking longer to cast increasing your ability, maybe casting as a full round gives you +2 to the roll?

[Dalebert]

In games where it's not reliable, it seems like less of a restricted resource. For instance, in Shadowrun, if you stay well within a certain power range for your ability, there's a decent chance you will not be impacted in anyway. Magic can (but doesn't necessarily) fatigue you or even harm you if you try too much but there are no spell slots or spell preparations.

Maybe you could implement something that's less discouraging to the players if you added a potential upside as well. For instance, depending on the level of the spell in comparison to the caster's level, stats, whatever other skill you deem necessary, maybe they would not always lose the spell if they rolled high enough.

[TheOneHawk]

So it seems this idea is being seen somewhat negatively and I'm curious why? The general consensus is that casters are too strong because they can do everything reliably. The goal here is to make them either able to do everything unreliably, or one thing reliably. Especially since my group tends to like crit fails and funny random stuff, I figured this would be a good way to approach the problem.

Also, current list of miscast a spoilers below. I'm hoping for 100 but could use some help. I'm thinking some should be beneficial as well. Thanks :)

1. Caster forced to dance on the spot for 1d4 rounds
2. Spell goes off with reverse effect
3. Spell goes off with a random target
4. Caster loses ability to speak common until curse is broken
5. Caster changes sex until curse is broken
6. Caster loses all spell slots of that level for the day
7. Spell goes off affected by a randomly determined metamagic feat
8. Caster is haunted by visions and needs to make a will save to act each round for 2d4 rounds. DC equal to spell cast DC.
9. Spell explodes in casters hand dealing 1d6+1 magic damage
10. Caster is turned into a small animal until curse is broken
11. Casters primary casting stat is drained by 2 for 24 hours
12. Caster is stunned next round
13. Caster is dazed for 1d4 rounds
14. Bright flashing lights explode outward from the caster
15. The sound of loud bell ringing emanates from the caster for 2d4 minutes
All I have for now. Will edit more later.

[Drachasor]

So it seems this idea is being seen somewhat negatively and I'm curious why? The general consensus is that casters are too strong because they can do everything reliably. The goal here is to make them either able to do everything unreliably, or one thing reliably. Especially since my group tends to like crit fails and funny random stuff, I figured this would be a good way to approach the problem.

It is a horrible idea.
1. Randomly wasted actions aren't fun. So adding a mechanic to have more wasted action isn't fun.
2. Casters have a very limited number of spells per day, especially at low levels. Combine this with wasted actions and it makes casters a real pain to play. This is especially true at low levels.
3. It does nothing to actually balance the powerful spells when they do work. Randomly working overpowered abilities are still overpowered.

Beyond just banning full casters (e.g. casters with 9th level spells), there's no quick fix. Heck, even that doesn't do anything to shore up non-casters who tend to be weak or lack versatility. The easiest fix is a combination of banning the weakest and strongest classes, adding in good martial classes like the Tome of Battle initiators, and generally trying to get people using classes on the same power level. Not trivial, but easier than class redesigns.

[TheOneHawk]

Martials have randomly wasted actions constantly, though. That's my issue. What makes it ok for martials but not casters? Rolling the dice on that attack that needs to hit or you're dead is fun, is it not? What's so different about a spell, other than limited slots per day.

I admit that with limited spells, failing on your only casting of an important spell does suck. I'm not trying to be argumentative, simply curious if there is a way in which this could work well.

[Drachasor]

Martials have randomly wasted actions constantly, though. That's my issue. What makes it ok for martials but not casters? Rolling the dice on that attack that needs to hit or you're dead is fun, is it not? What's so different about a spell, other than limited slots per day.

I admit that with limited spells, failing on your only casting of an important spell does suck. I'm not trying to be argumentative, simply curious if there is a way in which this could work well.

You answered your own questions; martials have unlimited actions. Also, there's the fact that it doesn't take too long before a well-made martial almost certainly hits with every attack. And a caster, if they want, can be risky with their limited spells and depend on saving throws (but it is their choice, which makes sense given limited options, I suppose). All that said, I personally think randomly wasted actions are not a great design element.

Like I said, there's no easy fix. And there's certainly no easy way to make your idea work well. You'd have to redesign the whole spell system to provide a lot more or infinite spells per day, but also tone down the power of problematic spells. It is important to remember that most spells of a given level are fine. It is just that there are a non-trivial number that are very powerful. Making a list of all such spells is not trivial either.

So getting this idea to work is far from a simple undertaking.

[kkplx]

Hey everyone! Something that has always irritated me about magic is its dependability. It seems really odd that wizards never ever **** up, even the first time they cast a spell. So I've been mulling over a way to work in a spell casting roll.

Basically, the idea I have is that casting a spell requires a check against dc 10 plus spell level x2. You get a bonus to the roll based on your casting stat and you can get bonuses to casting specific schools by selecting them as your favoured school and maybe some kind of skill point like system as you level up? I'm not a balance mastermind so I don't know how to make the roll into a thing that is non trivial but doesn't completely murder casting.

As a side point, I would really like to bring in a miscast table for rolling a mat 1 then confirming the crit fail by failing the roll again. I'm planning on making this a d100 so any random magic went wrong ideas would be appreciated to plug in.

Basically I'm looking for how to make casting a bit less reliable, more risky, but I don't know how hard it should be. Any advice would be appreciated, also if anyone has good ideas for fitting feats, that would be a plus.

Thanks so much!

No player will thank you for critical failure systems.

Wizards are fragile and highly dependant on their spellbooks/memorizations/spells per day. Magic is their shield, armor and sword. If you want to make their life harder/more challenging, target their weaknesses instead of ruining the one thing your player picked his class for.

How to do that has been talked about extensively on this board and i have not the patience to elaborate - google should help you there.

*edit*
We're even talking about pathfinder here, where you should have even less of a reason to screw over casters and wizards in particular.
Also, Drachosar had some very valid points for the case that you want to enforce such a system.

[CombatOwl]

Hey everyone! Something that has always irritated me about magic is its dependability. It seems really odd that wizards never ever **** up, even the first time they cast a spell. So I've been mulling over a way to work in a spell casting roll.

Going to make clerics roll to see if their domains work? Going to make druids roll to see if they wild shape correctly? To see if warriors actually have proficiency with their weapon today? A basic assumption of d20 is that your class abilities are dependable unless they say otherwise. You've attained the level you have because you'd developed sufficient skill to pull it off reliably.


Basically, the idea I have is that casting a spell requires a check against dc 10 plus spell level x2. You get a bonus to the roll based on your casting stat and you can get bonuses to casting specific schools by selecting them as your favoured school and maybe some kind of skill point like system as you level up?

Wow, talk about making evocation even worse than it already is. You'll never see another evoker with that system. Who would devote precious skill points to blasting?


I'm not a balance mastermind so I don't know how to make the roll into a thing that is non trivial but doesn't completely murder casting.

Why shouldn't it be trivial? I mean, you're a 5th level wizard because you've learned to reliably cast 3rd level spells. That should be reflected by not needing to roll when you cast. No one would ever live to be a 2nd level wizard if they ran even a 10% chance of blowing themselves up whenever they cast a spell.

That kind of system makes sense in skill-based games, not level-based games. If casting a fireball required a successful magic check at -10--and anyone who could make the check could cast it regardless of level--you'd have a point. But that's not the way D&D magic is designed to work, and hacking that is a pretty extreme change.


As a side point, I would really like to bring in a miscast table for rolling a mat 1 then confirming the crit fail by failing the roll again. I'm planning on making this a d100 so any random magic went wrong ideas would be appreciated to plug in.

People don't play wild mages because they don't want to do that sort of thing.


Basically I'm looking for how to make casting a bit less reliable, more risky,

Give powerful spells downsides, as per 2nd edition. You can pretty much just port over the same downsides, since the spell list isn't that different in core.


but I don't know how hard it should be. Any advice would be appreciated, also if anyone has good ideas for fitting feats, that would be a plus.

Seems like you really just want to play something other than D&D, which is totally okay. But when you telly our group "okay, we're going to play D&D now. All you wizards? You've got a harsh nerf now. Here's my homebrew on how I think wizards should get screwed over..." well that's hardly D&D at that point.


Martials have randomly wasted actions constantly, though. That's my issue. What makes it ok for martials but not casters?

You've never seen a monster make a save on a save-or-die? That's useless as tits on a bull. Spells already have a mechanism for failure--the save DC. You're wanting to give them another chance to fail.


Rolling the dice on that attack that needs to hit or you're dead is fun, is it not? What's so different about a spell, other than limited slots per day.

Whee, I'm a level 1 wizard. I try to cast sleep. Oops, I messed it up. Guess I'm done with fighting for the day, since now I'm a glorified commoner with a crossbow and no armor.


I admit that with limited spells, failing on your only casting of an important spell does suck. I'm not trying to be argumentative, simply curious if there is a way in which this could work well.

Not with vancian magic. Either remove the spells/day restriction or keep the reliable casting. Limited casting combined with frequent failure just means a class no one will touch. It's essentially just like banning the class, but more complex. Why not just play a sorcerer or a cleric?

[TheOneHawk]

Fair enough then. I really like the idea of powerful but dangerous magic, however switching systems is not an option and while I dislike the idea of never fail magic, you have all brought up some solid points. I'll just leave it be, then.

[BWR]

There is nothing inherently wrong with introducing a success/failure roll for casting in D&D but make sure your players are ok with it before you do so. If all the players are cool with it, fine. If I came to the table expecting to play a normal D&D wizard and are told when I cast my first spell "roll to see if you screw up" I would be rather annoyed and seriously reconsider my participation in that game. Being open about it at the start of a campaign is ok, springing it on the players mid-game is bad. And I always wanted to play a wild mage (the 2e version, not the crappy 3e one) because it sounded fun.

As others have noted, given the limited number of spells D&D casters can throw out at any one time, a roll for success should have a fairly high chance for success if they want to be useful in combat (would activating magic items have the same sort of roll? A required UMD roll for everything?).
If you want magic to be dangerous, as CombatOwl suggested, just look at 2e spells. Haste aged everyone a year. Wish aged you 5 years. Permanency cost a permanent Constitution point (no way of regaining except maybe Wish). Teleport had a chance of killing everyone. Shapechange cost 5000gp every time you cast it.
Throw enough penalties in the spells and players will become a bit more careful about how they use them, even if they do work all the time.

As an alternative to success rolls or individual side-effects of spells, you could require casters to make a Fortitude ST or CL check or similar to avoid taking damage while casting. Not much, maybe 1hp/spell level. Failure means they incorrectly handled the mystic power while casting. The spell goes off as planned, but they take some backlash.

[Vhaidara]

Wild Magic can be a beautiful thing, if your players are willing to roll with it. Officially, I think the rule is that there's a caster level check involved, made harder by higher level spells, and if they fail you roll on the Rod of Wonders table.

Or... you could roll on an alternate table. Like this one. (http://www.freewebs.com/orrex/NLRME.pdf)