Discussion on Rebalancing Magic?

[Amaril]

I'm thinking about ways to balance magic-users, likely for a more low-magic game, and I know I'd like to be able to do it with blanket alterations to the whole magic system rather than by editing spell lists in detail, since it requires much less work that way. I've seen and thought of several methods, any number of which I think could be useful. What are some ways you folks are fond of, or think could work well? If there's already an ongoing discussion of this elsewhere (I didn't see one, but I might have missed something), direction to it would be appreciated. Thanks :smallsmile:

[Extra Anchovies]

This thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?370494-How-would-you-un-bork-3-5-magic) is fairly related.

A quick suggestion from me: give all full casters six-level progressions a la the Adept, Bard, or Mystic Ranger. That's the quickest way to do it; if magic is uncommon, casters will be disproportionally powerful for their level, so slowing their spell progressions should balance them a bit (and would encourage more martial PCs, fitting for a low-magic game). Warlock, Binder, DFA, and other non-casting magic-users remain as-is, because they're lower-tier anyways.

ETA: If you do this, make Animate Dead a third- or even second-level spell for Dread Necromancers. Because another half-dozen levels of uselessness is not what they need.

[Psyren]

I know this isn't a popular suggestion, but a different system entirely might be better for low magic. 3.5/PF just do not do low-magic well, not unless you are very careful about monster choice.

[Amaril]

This thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?370494-How-would-you-un-bork-3-5-magic) is fairly related.

Right, I knew I saw one just a little while ago. I'll take this over there. Thanks for the help :smallsmile:

(If the mods want to delete this thread, they should feel free.)


I know this isn't a popular suggestion, but a different system entirely might be better for low magic. 3.5/PF just do not do low-magic well, not unless you are very careful about monster choice.

Yeah, I expected someone to say this. Really, this is more of a theoretical exercise than anything--I have no plans to actually run a low-magic game, or any other sort of D&D, any time in the foreseeable future. I just like coming up with settings, not all of which conform to high-powered D&D magic.

[VoxRationis]

I know this isn't a popular suggestion, but a different system entirely might be better for low magic. 3.5/PF just do not do low-magic well, not unless you are very careful about monster choice.

People say this all the time, but it's not that big a problem in my experience. In those campaigns I run as low-magic, I'm not exactly chomping at the bit as far as using particularly magical monsters goes.

[Fax Celestis]

Yeah, cutting back ninth casters to the bard progression does a lot towards lowering the curve.

[Psyren]

People say this all the time, but it's not that big a problem in my experience. In those campaigns I run as low-magic, I'm not exactly chomping at the bit as far as using particularly magical monsters goes.

Still, there's a lot of iconic baddies - dragons, medusas, swarms. just about anything incorporeal - that can cause unforeseen issues without magic or with weak magic.

[Amaril]

Okay, might as well bring this up here, then, since people don't seem to have a problem with multiple threads like this going at once. What effect would be had on the issue by running an E8 game with PHB content only? I know several of the game-breakers from core are removed with low level caps. I asked about this once before, but didn't really come away with what I felt was a complete enough picture.

[Fax Celestis]

I don't think you need to do both E8 and cut casting progressions. One or the other should be sufficient.

[georgie_leech]

Okay, might as well bring this up here, then, since people don't seem to have a problem with multiple threads like this going at once. What effect would be had on the issue by running an E8 game with PHB content only? I know several of the game-breakers from core are removed with low level caps. I asked about this once before, but didn't really come away with what I felt was a complete enough picture.

Level 4 spells is where a few of the more game breaking/changing abilities come in to play (e.g. Polymorph, Animate Dead, Divine Power, Divination, Wildshaping into Large Creatures), so be cautious when allowing full casters if not altering the progression. It's getting into the area where relevant plots start shifting from reacting to problems and villains and being able to actively seek them out.

[jiriku]

I have a simple broad-spectrum magic nerf (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?210623-3-5-Magic-Remix-The-Philosopher-s-Stone) you can look at. You may find a few useful ideas there.

[Amaril]

I don't think you need to do both E8 and cut casting progressions. One or the other should be sufficient.

Yeah, ignoring the fact that most RL campaigns never get past 8th level or so anyway, I agree. If I was gonna run an E8 game, I wouldn't nerf casting any further.


Level 4 spells is where a few of the more game breaking/changing abilities come in to play (e.g. Polymorph, Animate Dead, Divine Power, Divination, Wildshaping into Large Creatures), so be cautious when allowing full casters if not altering the progression. It's getting into the area where relevant plots start shifting from reacting to problems and villains and being able to actively seek them out.

Sure, I realize that, but is it as much of a problem if those kinds of abilities are basically capstones, rather than core elements of a caster's arsenal? I would expect not, and if the distinction of those kinds of powers is that access to them allows parties to begin taking a more proactive role in the plot, that's actually perfect. It naturally supports a structure where the players are confronted with a villain who starts out far beyond them, and gradually work to build up power until they're strong enough to be a fair match.

[Dalebert]

A quick suggestion from me: give all full casters six-level progressions a la the Adept, Bard, or Mystic Ranger.

Maybe this has been addressed in another thread and I apologize if it's been addressed elsewhere, but surely this comes with some kind of compensation. Otherwise, why ever play a wizard instead of someone with the same caster progression plus extra bennies? Wizards and sorcerers are gimped in multiple ways because they're so focused on casting better than the half-caster classes like BAB, armor, hit points, etc. Why would anyone play them at all anymore if they're now pretty much on now on par with bards and paladins?

One quick and consistent fix that I've often thought of is to just take away all their higher level spell slots (7, 8, and 9). Allow them access to those higher level spells once they reach the appropriate level but at a steep price. For instance, figure out some math for how many of their lower level slots they have to use. Just brainstorming, but something like two 4th level spells in place of a 7th, two 5ths for an 8th, and two 6th for a 9th. Something like that could at least keep them from casually tossing around shapechange on a daily basis. You could alternatively (or in addition) say that these spells take extra ritual preparation that would make them unrecoverable in the middle of an adventure. Something like that. Again, those are brainstorms and not thought out for balance.

[Fax Celestis]

Because they still get access to the broadest and most powerful spell list in the game?

[Extra Anchovies]

Because they still get access to the broadest and most powerful spell list in the game?

This. Also, in a low-magic game (as is the OP's goal), the party wizard is not going to run into very many other magic users. Thus, their magic will be more powerful relative to the enemies they face than in the average magic-out-the-ears D&D game.

[Dalebert]

Because they still get access to the broadest and most powerful spell list in the game?

Has anyone actually tried this and found it to balance out? Clerics are different, but for wizards and sorcerers, casting spells is all they can do. They already tend to be weak at the early levels and I realize they have a sharp power curve after a certain point, but you're taking a class that is nothing but spellcasting and then just saying you have way less spells per day and slower access to higher level spells. Seems like overkill in the wrong areas of dysfunction, like they would dominate for a little while and then suddenly be almost useless. This seems like it would make the early levels especially tedious. Has anyone actually implemented this and still had players want to play a wizard or sorcerer and actually not get frustrated and stick around with that character past say, level 7?

[Fax Celestis]

Has anyone actually tried this and found it to balance out? Clerics are different, but for wizards and sorcerers, casting spells is all they can do. They already tend to be weak at the early levels and I realize they have a sharp power curve after a certain point, but you're taking a class that is nothing but spellcasting and then just saying you have way less spells per day and slower access to higher level spells. Seems like overkill in the wrong areas of dysfunction, like they would dominate for a little while and then suddenly be almost useless. This seems like it would make the early levels especially tedious. Has anyone actually implemented this and still had players want to play a wizard or sorcerer and actually not get frustrated and stick around with that character past say, level 7?

Yes. Every game I run uses the following banlist, and I have had no issues so far. It tends to shift player class selection towards less-utilized classes, which I think is a bonus.


Allowed Content: All 3.5/PF, with some specific exemptions. Homebrew is encouraged but must be approved on a case-by-case basis. Use the magic item creation rules from MIC for custom items, and approve all custom items with me. Specific itemizations as follows:


The First Rule: You breaka mah gaem, I breaka yo faec. Be reasonable.
Broad-Spectrum Bans: Anything with 9th level casting is out. Anything that goes over 6 levels of casting is probably out. We are not using Multiclass Experience Penalties or Favored Classes. Planetouched races (incl. genasi) are not races: they are templates with the standard level adjustment they would have carried before.
Core: Cleric, Druid, Sorcerer, Wizard are banned. Leadership is banned. Paladins use the d20r variant. Spells and items that deal with alignment (helm of opposite alignment, detect evil, magic circle against law, etc.) don't exist. If you want to play an Expert, Adept, or Aristocrat, let me know and we can work out some actual features to make the classes more interesting. Adepts in particular should talk to me. If you somehow pick up wildshape, use the PHB-II Shapeshift variant instead.
Player's Handbook 2: If you want to play a Dragon Shaman, let's talk about how to make it a little better. Beguilers use the Bard's spell progression. Arcane Thesis applies once per spell, not once per metamagic per spell.
Expanded Psionics Handbook: Psion and Wilder are banned. Soulknife uses the Pathfinder version. Marksman, Dread, Cryptic, Aegis, and Tactician from Psionics Unleashed (PF) are available. Elan is an LA +1 template, not a race, and gives an additional +2 Int. Dromites and Blues use the Pathfinder variant.
Eberron Campaign Setting: Artificer is provisionally banned--you can make one, but it will probably not be approved. Subraces (wild elves, earth dwarves, azurin, etc.) are allowed to take dragonmarks related to their parent race.

BoED: Material from this book is probably inappropriate for this campaign, but if you're dead set on using something, we'll talk.
BoVD: Material from this book is probably inappropriate for this campaign, but if you're dead set on using something, we'll talk.
Cityscape: Invisible Spell is a +1 adjustment.
Complete Arcane: Warmage is exempted from the above ninths-ban. Wu Jen is banned. Extra Spell functions exactly like Expanded Knowledge.
Complete Divine: The base classes presented in this book are banned, except Favored Soul, which uses either Wisdom or Charisma (your choice) for spellcasting (instead of Wisdom/Charisma) and uses the Bard's spell progression and spells known mechanics.
Complete Psionic: The Ardent and Erudite are banned. The Divine Mind is okay, but is probably inappropriate for this campaign. If you want to play a Lurk, I would recommend looking up the Psychic Rogue instead.
Complete Warrior: The Samurai is terrible but is probably repairable. Talk to me if you want to use this.
Draconomicon: Dragonwrought Kobolds don't qualify for epic feats.
Dungeonscape: The Factotum's abilities are limited to once per round (so no Cunning Strike or Cunning Surge ridiculosity).
Heroes of Horror: The Dread Necromancer and Archivist are banned.
Magic of Incarnum: The Soulborn is terrible but is probably repairable. Talk to me if you want to use this.
Tome of Battle: Material from this book is probably inappropriate for this campaign, but if you're dead set on using something, we'll talk.
Tome of Magic: Shadowcasters are explicitly exempt from the no-ninths abilities above but are as-written. Alternatively, we can work out a six-level mystery progression and switch the uses/mystery/day table to a uses/mystery/encounter table.
Weapons of Legacy: Utilizing a Weapon of Legacy does not inflict penalties upon its wielder, but is limited to one per player. Custom Legacy Weapons are acceptable but must be cleared with me. The Legacy Champion cannot advance class features beyond their original class maximums (sorry, Hellfire Warlocks).
Pathfinder Material: Provisionally okay as long as it doesn't violate the above rules. I would prefer no Summoners, but we can talk.

This is not a comprehensive list, and I reserve the right to say no to something during the character creation process and to work with you to make something not broken that slipped by me if it turns up over the course of the game. If you want to utilize something but think it's terrible, talk to me and we can see about making it work.

[Zaq]

Okay, might as well bring this up here, then, since people don't seem to have a problem with multiple threads like this going at once. What effect would be had on the issue by running an E8 game with PHB content only? I know several of the game-breakers from core are removed with low level caps. I asked about this once before, but didn't really come away with what I felt was a complete enough picture.

E8 with PHB only is going to get very boring very fast. There aren't that many good feats in the PHB. You're going to end up taking crap like Toughness and Stealthy, and that doesn't feel like you're really advancing.

PHB classes only might be another matter. But PHB content only is just not going to be fun in an E-anything paradigm.

[JusticeZero]

E6, anything goes, allow 4th level spells as ritual spells. Should do the trick. Core only is horrible, and as noted, the worst stuff in the game is core only.

[Amaril]

E8 with PHB only is going to get very boring very fast. There aren't that many good feats in the PHB. You're going to end up taking crap like Toughness and Stealthy, and that doesn't feel like you're really advancing.

PHB classes only might be another matter. But PHB content only is just not going to be fun in an E-anything paradigm.

Alright, well I've never actually met any players IRL who've had a problem with core only, but for this theoretical discussion, I'll accept the premise. So, how about we say core only classes, no ACFs, and non-core feats by individual review (to cut out the immediately problematic stuff like metamagic reduction)? How much would that help? What would be the stuff to watch out for in that case? And would one want to allow non-core spells as well, or is the spell selection not one of the problems with core-only?


E6, anything goes, allow 4th level spells as ritual spells. Should do the trick. Core only is horrible, and as noted, the worst stuff in the game is core only.

Ritual spells as in the 5e definition, 10-minute casting time? Or something else?

[Dalebert]

Yes. Every game I run uses the following banlist, and I have had no issues so far. It tends to shift player class selection towards less-utilized classes, which I think is a bonus.

That's not what I asked. You're banning them outright. That's fine. I'm talking about the suggestion to gimp their spellcasting down to that of hybrid classes without actually giving them any hybrid benefits to compensate. I don't think I would ever play the classes in those circumstances. I'd just play a bard and have just as many spells of the same levels AND be a skillmonkey AND wear armor and fight better AND have performance buffs, etc.

[Extra Anchovies]

That's not what I asked. You're banning them outright. That's fine. I'm talking about the suggestion to gimp their spellcasting down to that of hybrid classes without actually giving them any hybrid benefits to compensate. I don't think I would ever play the classes in those circumstances. I'd just play a bard and have just as many spells of the same levels AND be a skillmonkey AND wear armor and fight better AND have performance buffs, etc.

Exactly. The goal is for a low-magic setting, so if players are motivated to take classes that aren't normally full casters, then mission accomplished.

[VoxRationis]

Frankly, feat advancement in e6 or e8 seems like an afterthought anyway. If I wanted continual progression, I wouldn't play a version that deliberately curtailed progression to a single facet of character-building. Players can accumulate power through means other than levels and feats (magic items, followers, alliances and influence, etc.).

[Zaq]

Frankly, feat advancement in e6 or e8 seems like an afterthought anyway. If I wanted continual progression, I wouldn't play a version that deliberately curtailed progression to a single facet of character-building. Players can accumulate power through means other than levels and feats (magic items, followers, alliances and influence, etc.).

Having actually played a fair bit of E6, I respectfully disagree. It's different from vanilla D&D (e20?), but you still feel like you're advancing. It's a different flavor of optimization, but I like it quite a bit.

[JusticeZero]

So, how about we say core only classes, no ACFs, and non-core feats by individual review (to cut out the immediately problematic stuff like metamagic reduction)? How much would that help? What would be the stuff to watch out for in that case? And would one want to allow non-core spells as well, or is the spell selection not one of the problems with core-only?The things to watch out for are primarily found in the PHB. Splats are where your non-T1's get their versatility and power; the full list casters mostly just get flavor options. Some of the better powergamers can detail this better.

Ritual spells as in the 5e definition, 10-minute casting time? Or something else?
Yes, with other restrictions of some kind. My own solution was to create "Craft Altar", creating a big and immobile magic item like a throne, altar, etc. that allows the user to cast a higher level spell built into it while touching it. That let me put some effects in, but access to those effects is not portable.

[Feylor]

On how much your wanton to cut the power level down, perhaps just go with the wizards having to pick two schools maybe 3 that they can actually pull spells from. That will cut some of the versitality out without gimping 9th level spells?

[Divide by Zero]

On how much your wanton to cut the power level down, perhaps just go with the wizards having to pick two schools maybe 3 that they can actually pull spells from. That will cut some of the versitality out without gimping 9th level spells?

Conjuration and Transmutation alone have like 90% of the gamebreakers. If the two were mutually exclusive, that would help, but they'd probably still be at least Tier 2 by current standards.

[Dalebert]

Exactly. The goal is for a low-magic setting, so if players are motivated to take classes that aren't normally full casters, then mission accomplished.

If the goal is for people not to play them, just ban them. Don't make them pointless.

[Fax Celestis]

If the goal is for people not to play them, just ban them. Don't make them pointless.

6th level casting is not pointless.

[sonofzeal]

There's a quick-and-easy balance fix in my sig. I've used it, it worked well - it gave the Cleric a time to shine without overpowering the rest of the party elsewise, and the result was both dramatic and fun. The Wizard one I've never been quite happy with, but the others work.

[Dalebert]

6th level casting is not pointless.

It's pointless to be nothing but a caster when you can instead be just as much a caster plus other hybrid stuph. It makes no sense to take a pure caster class and drop their casting down to the exact same amount of casting as a hybrid class. Casting is ALL they do. You're just lopping them off. It's not even explained how sorcerers are any different than wizards. Why ever play a sorcerer if you don't have more spells per day than a wizard who has no more spells per day than a bard. You took away the "point" of those classes which was to be highly specialized in just casting at the price of everything else. The wizard runs out of spells just as fast as the bard and then is useless while the bard remains useful in a myriad ways.

Also, how do you re-balance encounters, particularly high-level ones, to account for the loss of regular access to lvl 7+ spells and simply fewer spells in general? This heavy-handed over-simplified solution seems to create a domino effect of complications.

[georgie_leech]

It's pointless to be nothing but a caster when you can instead be just as much a caster plus other hybrid stuph. It makes no sense to take a pure caster class and drop their casting down to the exact same amount of casting as a hybrid class. Casting is ALL they do. You're just lopping them off. It's not even explained how sorcerers are any different than wizards. Why ever play a sorcerer if you don't have more spells per day than a wizard who has no more spells per day than a bard. You took away the "point" of those classes which was to be highly specialized in just casting at the price of everything else. The wizard runs out of spells just as fast as the bard and then is useless while the bard remains useful in a myriad ways.

Also, how do you re-balance encounters, particularly high-level ones, to account for the loss of regular access to lvl 7+ spells and simply fewer spells in general? This heavy-handed over-simplified solution seems to create a domino effect of complications.

While Sorcerers are indeed shafted somewhat in this regard, Wizards at least still have the ability to acquire and use a much greater variety of spells. Sort of like how the Fighter gets access to a much greater variety of Feats, even Barbarians can still take most of them and get actual class abilities :smalltongue:

[Fax Celestis]

Go back and look at my ban list. I think we're talking past each other here.