Making the casters MAD

[gr8artist]

So, one of the common complaints about 3.5/PF optimization is that mundanes need more high attributes than casters. Generally, a fighter/tank needs 2 minimum, often 3, and a wizard needs only 1, though if he gets around to it he may sink some buffs into Con or Dex.
So why not rewrite the rules for magic to make it a little more MAD?

Minimum ability score necessary to cast a spell remains unchanged (Int for wizards, Cha for sorcerers, Wis for clerics).
Spell DC's are based on Cha. Forcefulness and determination against opposing forces.
Spells per day based on Wis. Better preparation and ability to tap into potential.
Caster level checks based on Int. Circumventing problems and exploiting weaknesses.
Where needed, spells learned or known based on Int.

Its not a complete fix, but I feel like it does nerf the casters some. You'd need a clause about only applying these rules to full or 2/3 casters, as you don't want to nerf paladins or rangers.
Thoughts? Opinions?

[heavyfuel]

What I dislike most about casters in 3.5 is that in a fair amount of fantasy settings, casters can hold themselves in melee and many settings have the "body is just as important as mind" thing going on. They're not weak, dis-coordinated, fragile scholars.

Maybe something like getting extra spell slots based on the sum of your physical abilities instead of mental abilities? I'd like this very much. Also, this is a boost to Gish types, which is nice (though I am biased in this last statement...)

I look forward to see what this thread brings.

[torrasque666]

I would find it interesting for different kinds of magic to have different Abilities for their DCs. Evocation spells for example, use strength because a lot of evocation is pure damage. What else is usually used for pure damage? Strength. And I now have an image of BLASTY MC FACEPUNCH in a magical duel with SCRAWNY BOOKNERD for world domination.

[Red Fel]

So, one of the common complaints about 3.5/PF optimization is that mundanes need more high attributes than casters.

This is actually an incomplete thought. The problem isn't just that mundanes need more high attributes than casters. It's that they need more high attributes to be effective at a given task.

The problem with what you propose is that, while it makes spellcasting more inconvenient, it doesn't actually make it ineffective. The most powerful spells are still gamebreaking. Smart casters will avoid CL checks or DCs. There are still ways to pull off more spells, more powerful spells, easy recharges.

Your proposal is exactly what you describe - a nerf - but it addresses the wrong issue. To paraphrase a Grod-quote that has since become semi-famous, making the broken mechanic - in this case, a spellcaster's powerful spells - inconvenient does not actually fix the problem.

My Wizard may need to focus on Wis to get more spells per day, or on Cha for his DCs and Int for his CL checks, but he doesn't need any of that to cast Gate - he just needs the one spell. And now he can have a Solar Wish for pretty much whatever he wants, including an army of Solars. Game broken. My Cleric may have the same limitations, but he already uses Wis (and Cha, to a lesser extent), so it's no big deal. And really, none of that matters if he's simply using Miracle to win the game.

And that's the point. What you've done is increased bookkeeping, and made casters slightly more inconvenient to use. But at the end of the day, you're not making them substantially less powerful, or noticeably narrowing the gap between casters and mundanes.

[gr8artist]

I would find it interesting for different kinds of magic to have different Abilities for their DCs. Evocation spells for example, use strength because a lot of evocation is pure damage. What else is usually used for pure damage? Strength. And I now have an image of BLASTY MC FACEPUNCH in a magical duel with SCRAWNY BOOKNERD for world domination.
It's been done (http://cdn.fansided.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/276/files/2014/04/tumblr_mkyqbc9PWj1qf2huro1_500.gif).

And yes, I realize that this by no means fixes the issue entirely, but rather that it corrects one small discrepancy. Most optimizers realize that there are a few game breaking spells (gate, wish, miracle, etc) but fixing/removing those spells is another part of the problem. In a world where there were no overpowered spells and spells didn't outright overshadow mundanes in optimized play, and the only difference was SAD casters vs MAD mundanes, the casters still have a powerful advantage.
The proposed changes are a simple, easily incorporated fix to one part of the caster vs mundane optimization problem.

I think that most fantasy genre casters are able to fight or hold their own because they're not optimized or min/maxed, but rather developed more completely as a whole. They sacrifice magical power for more sustainability or a wider skill set. Gandalf was not a min/maxed 20th level wizard.
Occasionally you see a character who IS min/maxed, though they're most often Disney villains or eccentric old coots.
I have trouble seeing a correlation between physical attributes and magical power, unless you're theming your magic as ki/chi/chairs.
Caster level checks, perhaps, could be based on the sum of all attributes. A healthy mage casts more durable and potent spells, though less exploitive and fewer of them.
Perhaps there's a possibility for different Save DCs based on different attributes. Fortitude saves are derived from your understanding of the body or application of force - based on Str. Reflex saves are a competition of speed and precision - based on Dex. Will saves are a direct conflict between your willpower and that of another - based on Cha.

[Snowbluff]

Don't bother. Such a waste, and only hurts the more interesting MC builds.

My personal HB idea that I am working on for a DkS style casting system:
1 stat for DCs, 1 for bonus slots, and another for bonus slots that can only recast spells (scales slightly faster than general slots).
Different casters have different casting stats, which will heavily affect which of the three kinds of bonuses they get. For example, Cha might be DCs, so a sorc will be naturally suited for save-or-suck style spells. Int would be bonus slots, since a wizard is a more of a plan a head kind of style, which gives you variety. Wis will be recasts, since clerical work and buffs often have to be used multiple times per day, like a CLW or Barkskin.

[Flickerdart]

I would find it interesting for different kinds of magic to have different Abilities for their DCs. Evocation spells for example, use strength because a lot of evocation is pure damage. What else is usually used for pure damage? Strength. And I now have an image of BLASTY MC FACEPUNCH in a magical duel with SCRAWNY BOOKNERD for world domination.
3.0 psionics did it, and it was terrible.

[Werephilosopher]

I would find it interesting for different kinds of magic to have different Abilities for their DCs. Evocation spells for example, use strength because a lot of evocation is pure damage. What else is usually used for pure damage? Strength. And I now have an image of BLASTY MC FACEPUNCH in a magical duel with SCRAWNY BOOKNERD for world domination.

Reminds me of 3.0 psionics...

Edit: Swordsage'd dangit

[Curmudgeon]

Here's how I tone down spellcasters:

Primary casting stat is the one which requires a score equal to at least 10 + the spell level.

If your primary spellcasting stat is INT, your CHA determines bonus spells and WIS determines spell DCs.
If your primary spellcasting stat is CHA, your WIS determines bonus spells and INT determines spell DCs.
If your primary spellcasting stat is WIS, your INT determines bonus spell and CHA determines spell DCs.

The idea is that spellcasters will need all of the mental stats the way martial characters need all of the physical stats.

[Svata]

Very few martials need all three physical stats. Usually 2/3 will get the job done.

[Psyren]

Here's how I tone down spellcasters:

Primary casting stat is the one which requires a score equal to at least 10 + the spell level.

If your primary spellcasting stat is INT, your CHA determines bonus spells and WIS determines spell DCs.
If your primary spellcasting stat is CHA, your WIS determines bonus spells and INT determines spell DCs.
If your primary spellcasting stat is WIS, your INT determines bonus spell and CHA determines spell DCs.

The idea is that spellcasters will need all of the mental stats the way martial characters need all of the physical stats.

All casters have to do to get around this is put a 13 in their "primary stat," use items to get it to 19, max out the bonus spell stat and dump the DC stat while relying on saveless spells.

In short, they'd be no weaker than a saveless psion (who needs a 13 in Wis.)

[gr8artist]

Here's how I tone down spellcasters:

Primary casting stat is the one which requires a score equal to at least 10 + the spell level.

If your primary spellcasting stat is INT, your CHA determines bonus spells and WIS determines spell DCs.
If your primary spellcasting stat is CHA, your WIS determines bonus spells and INT determines spell DCs.
If your primary spellcasting stat is WIS, your INT determines bonus spell and CHA determines spell DCs.

The idea is that spellcasters will need all of the mental stats the way martial characters need all of the physical stats.

This is essentially what I've proposed, though a bit more complicated.

And yes, most mundanes only want 2 good physical stats, but many people have already pointed out that the caster will simply focus on 2 and use spells that don't require the third.
The recast slots are an interesting idea, I would like to see more detail at some point.

[Psyren]

They don't even need to focus on 2 - one can be dumped while the other is mediocre and they will have nearly as much powers as they did before. A character focused on, say, summoning, or shapeshifting, or orbs, will barely notice the change.

[Extra Anchovies]

I'd say the easiest way to go about this is houserule all the primary casters to have one ability for bonus spells and another for save DCs, similar to the Archivist (and I think the Favored Soul, too), and also to have intelligent enemies anticipate the fact that they may face a spellcaster. That wizard is going to need all the dexterity he can get (or expend potentially vital spells) when a few of the goblins hang back and ignore the meatshield in favor of lauching poisoned arrows at Squishy Mr. Bookworm.

[StoneCipher]

I don't think there is any way you can nerf casters to the point where they will be on par with mundanes without doing TONS of rule changes. A crafty caster will always find a way around your rules. However, buffing mundanes is easier and makes people happy instead of mad.

[gr8artist]

Ok, it admittedly doesn't fix the problem of mundanes vs casters, but it is at least a solution to one aspect of the problem.
Now, clearly and concisely, what problems would a DM expect to face if he implemented this houserule that he wouldn't have otherwise?

[Milodiah]

I'd say the easiest way to go about this is houserule all the primary casters to have one ability for bonus spells and another for save DCs, similar to the Archivist (and I think the Favored Soul, too), and also to have intelligent enemies anticipate the fact that they may face a spellcaster. That wizard is going to need all the dexterity he can get (or expend potentially vital spells) when a few of the goblins hang back and ignore the meatshield in favor of lauching poisoned arrows at Squishy Mr. Bookworm.


This is one of the ways that I try to use to fix spellcasting, by the way. It's not that we need to fix the mechanics, it's that we need to learn to operate better within the mechanics that are set for us. And I don't mean optimization, I mean...well, stuff like that.

[Psyren]

Ok, it admittedly doesn't fix the problem of mundanes vs casters, but it is at least a solution to one aspect of the problem.
Now, clearly and concisely, what problems would a DM expect to face if he implemented this houserule that he wouldn't have otherwise?

Inexperienced caster players will try to maintain all three stats and become mediocre at each. They might even go to the horrifying expedient of putting a point in one at 4, another at 8, another at 12...

This will have a deleterious effect on the party's success as a whole. Fewer bonus spells means the caster will be stingier with the ones he does get, and less willing to spend them healing or buffing his comrades. Lower save DCs will lead to wasted turns and frustration. And of course, for those players who do have lower primary stats, you the DM will have to be sure they have the stat boosting items they need to not miss out on spell levels they should rightly have access to due to their class progression.

At mid to high levels, one of the big problems with "nerf the casters" that many people overlook is that casters are a big part of the party's success as a whole. Many monsters are designed specifically as puzzles for magic to solve, e.g. medusas, displacer beasts, ropers, balors and swarms of all kinds. Then there are other challenges non-casters are ill-equipped to deal with - things like natural disasters, finding a needle in a haystack, saving someone important who is dying etc.

[1pwny]

I would say a big reason why Casters are so SAD is that their primary casting stat also influences their Extra Spells per Day. Meanwhile, in other fantasy settings, spellcasting is really limited by your physical endurance.

Spellcasters already learn more spells for having Int. There's no need to change that.

However, I feel like Wis, representing experience, should have a bigger part to play in any spellcaster. Maybe limit the amount of metamagic you can apply based on it?

Thus, in my opinion, a realistic way to make casters MAD would be to do this:

Spells Known based off Int (representing your capacity to learn).
Spells per Day based off Con (representing endurance/stamina).
Save DC/Metamagic based off of Wis (representing experience with spellcasting).

I think this makes sense. Give me feedback, if you want! :smallbiggrin:

[HaikenEdge]

I think what would happen in that case is that you'd end up with the Con-based caster, who uses gear to get Int up high enough to learn the necessary spells, then uses a high con to (A) feed HP and Fort saves, and (B) increase spells per day. They'd still pick spells with no minimal saving throws, and metamagic isn't always necessary on builds, it just makes things easier.

Basically, you'd have the single-attribute, Con caster.

[1pwny]

I think what would happen in that case is that you'd end up with the Con-based caster, who uses gear to get Int up high enough to learn the necessary spells, then uses a high con to (A) feed HP and Fort saves, and (B) increase spells per day. They'd still pick spells with no minimal saving throws, and metamagic isn't always necessary on builds, it just makes things easier.

Basically, you'd have the single-attribute, Con caster.

Well, yeah, but what are they going to do about saves?

Plus, its not really that much different from how it is already.

[toapat]

Another problem is, Casters having SADD is a different problem then mundanes having MADD.

The reason why Casters can have SADD and be effective is that, unlike Mundanes, their success is based almost wholly on a Yes/No digital result where they either have been effective or not, and that their power comes entirely from spells being in reality, independant on your attributes for effectiveness

To compare, melees have to face damage reduction much more frequently, as well as they have the need to have HP to survive counterattacks and the dex to mitigate damage. Their success is analogue because the only Absolute defense they face is AC.

The only real way to fix Mundane MADD is to brazenly steal 5th edition's version of Finess and the pathfinder versions of the special attacks. Simply put, SAD isnt unhealthy in and of itself.

In other words, to fix SAD you have to delete Str and merge it with Dex

[HaikenEdge]

Well, yeah, but what are they going to do about saves?

Plus, its not really that much different from how it is already.

What about saves? They'll be picking spells that have Saving Throw: None, and they already get a high enough Will save from class that they don't really need to boost Wis to improve that save.

[Thurbane]

The main thing that annoys me about 3.X casters is the most powerful are SAD (except Archivist), but lower tier ones like Favored Soul and Healer are MAD. It's ridiculous, and should be the other way around.

Tier 1 and 2 casters should have dual casting stats.

[gooddragon1]

Casters who are MAD will simply resort to spells that don't allow saves. They will focus on the ability score that gives them spells. It's a nerf, but it's the spells that are the problem. You cast gate and start chain gating titans and you win a combat. You use it for efreet and you win the game. Even for less powerful things there are many low level combos (most of which I don't remember) that casters can use with few spell slots. I think Tippy or others with more knowledge of the 3.5 magic system could expand on this more and tell you why a nerf like this is something but it won't stop the casters... all it does is raise the skill floor required for effective use.

EDIT: From what I read in the OP... Int maxed. Use no save spells and buffs and summons to avoid DC problems. Maximize use of spell interactions to work around spells per day being limited. In optimization, one of the quotes I remember is "don't think with your spell slots".