PDA

View Full Version : This houserule wouldn't really change much about full-casters, right? (PEACH)



DracoDei
2014-07-05, 01:03 PM
The Rule:
No particular ability score is an absolute requirement for casting any given type of spell. You can have a Int of 6 and still cast 9th level spells as a wizard, however, if you have a penalty to your casting stat, apply it to your number of spells per day for each spell level for each casting progression you have that uses that casting stat. Domain and Specialist wizard slots are lost last.

Examples:
A 1st level Wizard (Necromantic Specialist) with an 8 intelligence would have two 0th level spell slots that he could prepare any spell he knows in, an additional 0th level spell slot he could prepare only a necromancy spell in, and a single 1st level spell slot that could only be used for necromancy spells.

A 1st level Cleric with a 6 wisdom would only be able to prepare a single 0th level spell per day, and no 1st level spells at all. Upon advancing to 2nd level in cleric, they would be able to prepare two 0th level spells, and would have a 1st level domain spell slot.

The Question:
What would this be likely to change in actual play? I could see it making dipping sorcerer for True Strike or something a bit more tasty, and I'm sure that the Awakened Gelatinous Cube Cleric/Sorcerer/Wizard would take its place alongside the Gelatinous Cube Monk as weird character concepts. Overall, however? I'm thinking it won't do much.

zingbobco000
2014-07-05, 01:28 PM
Good idea, overall, you're right, it wouldn't change that much. All it would mainly change is a dip's MAD. Nice fix, I probably wouldn't use it though in my game, but that's just me.

Overall: I see this as just a reduction of MAD for some characters (Paladin springs to mind).

Grod_The_Giant
2014-07-05, 01:46 PM
I'd say pretty much nil. You generally won't take caster levels unless you've got at least a halfway-decent ability modifier, after all.

kinem
2014-07-05, 07:49 PM
Not everyone should have what it takes to be a wizard (or cleric, sorcerer, etc), especially not a powerful one. So I like the flavor of the original rule and don't think it should be changed.

For existing casters, the change would make them stronger by nerfing one of the ways of shutting them down, ability damage.

DracoDei
2014-07-05, 09:05 PM
Thank you to everyone who responded so far.


Good idea, overall, you're right, it wouldn't change that much. All it would mainly change is a dip's MAD.
How much more attractive would that make dipping though?


Nice fix, I probably wouldn't use it though in my game, but that's just me.
Actually, I wasn't per se planning to use it myself. It is more my double checking a design principle for a massive and long-running project of mine (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?247637-Semi-hiatus-to-avoid-wearing-new-reviewers-out-but-ANYONE-can-post-here-if-you-want). Warning: When I say "massive" I mean it. This thing is a small splat-book, despite it just being a single class... and I'm still working on the main table for it, trying to strike a balance between reminding people which abilities improve at which levels, and brevity. You are going to look at the table and see "broken cheese" what with the "d12, all good saves, 6+Int Bonus, Divine Grace"... don't be fooled. Every part of that is required for the class to be halfway playable. And then you are going to see some very powerful abilities (class level to initiative, swift-action casting)... keep reading... it will all make sense when you see what their spells actually DO (and if it doesn't then ask me).


Overall: I see this as just a reduction of MAD for some characters (Paladin springs to mind).
Yeah, keeping MAD down is good, but for the class in question, you really don't want to put anything lower than your second-highest ability score into the "casting stat", and even that would be an unusual decision.


Not everyone should have what it takes to be a wizard (or cleric, sorcerer, etc), especially not a powerful one. So I like the flavor of the original rule and don't think it should be changed.
Yeah, and that is fine for those classes. In this case? Part of the fluff WAS more of a concept I had that even a "3d6, in order" NPC with this class should be highly regarded as a valuable member of the community especially once they hit level 4 or so. I say "WAS" because there is a good point down below that changes that and makes me go "yeah, I made the correct decision, and that verbage isn't wasted, even in actual play".


For existing casters, the change would make them stronger by nerfing one of the ways of shutting them down, ability damage.
*Nods*
PERFECT!
Grace-Gifts are supposed to fight contribute to combat even when wrecked. 1 hitpoint, slowed, and all stats reduced to 1 (except for enough strength to remain able to perform spells while prone due to the weight of their chain shirt)? They might not be able to contribute much, but they will at least be able to get the attackers to notice their defiance.