Lengthening casting time

[torrasque666]

How much would it cripple the magic system if spells were lengthened to include a minimum of 1 minute/spell level(0ths are 30 seconds)? This would still allow for magic items to exist and scrolls and wands could still be used(removing the bit about wands taking the same casting time as the spell and changing them all to standard action). Quicken Metamagic would be right out of course. I would hope that this would have the effect of actually encouraging skill use(why wait for a minute to cast knock when the rogue can take 6 seconds to open the door?) while regulating magic to a kind of backdrop element.

[Knaight]

A few spells simply won't work well at all anymore (feather fall comes to mind), and combats are fast enough that this basically removes battlefield casting. 10 rounds might be a bit much, and 5 rounds is definitely too much for a cantrip. That said, increasing time to cast enough that it activates at the start of the round after a spell is cast works pretty universally, and a full round charging also works there.

[Kelb_Panthera]

I'd go with something more on the order of 1 round per spell level. Low level spells can still be used in combat, mid level spells become a gambit, high level spells are relegated to either out of combat only or to only the most difficult battles that will last long enough to get them off.

[torrasque666]

A few spells simply won't work well at all anymore (feather fall comes to mind), and combats are fast enough that this basically removes battlefield casting. 10 rounds might be a bit much, and 5 rounds is definitely too much for a cantrip. That said, increasing time to cast enough that it activates at the start of the round after a spell is cast works pretty universally, and a full round charging also works there.
Still..... doesn't seem enough for what I'm trying to do. I see magic as something that is raw and powerful. Something that needs time to prepare and control without mishap. While still allowing for lower level magical play through the use of items. Basically I kinda want to shut T1s down but I'm also a person who applys bans both ways. Bans to them apply to myself as well when I DM. I can't outright ban T1s because without them, no magical items. But I also don't enjoy the fact that most skills and abilities of lower tier characters can be negated through magic. Chasm? Fly. Locked Door? Knock.
High Wall? Levitate. Hostile Guard? Charm. Charm didn't work? Dominate. Contain Prisoners? Flesh-to-Stone and a Portable Hole.

Get my point? I basically want to neuter its versatility so that it doesn't become Wizard-and-Cleric-and-their-two-tagalongs, but that the rogue is needed for skill challenges that need to be done quickly and the fighter's brute strength can carry the team through difficult terrain.

[Kelb_Panthera]

You don't need T1's or T2's to craft magic items. They just do it better. Warlocks can craft any item in the game with a successful UMD check. Midgard Dwarves (frostburn) can craft any armor, weapon, ring, or wondrous item as though they met the prerequisites and had the feats. Even the T3/4 list casters and the bard can take item creation feats if they so choose.

Banning the upmost tiers has a very minimal impact on the game's design expectations. If anything it actually brings things -more- in line with what was expected.

[torrasque666]

Hmmm..... midgard dwarves would be interesting. Definitely corners the magic item market.

But even lower tier casters can still invalidate the skill checks that a non-caster could bring to the party. Like I mentioned earlier, any caster capable of casting fly invalidates a jump check, or a climb check. any caster capable of casting knock negates anyone who invested in disable device/open lock.

hell, any caster capable of casting Summon Monster can almost completely negate the rest of their party.

[Tohsaka Rin]

And anyone in melee range with combat reflexes can negate a caster completely.

Or a couple of guys at range with bows and readied actions.

Just because magic is powerful doesn't mean they can't be taken down just as easily on their own as anyone else. DnD is above all else a collaborative game.

Besides, 'Always geek the Mage' doesn't everybody know that?

[torrasque666]

And anyone in melee range with combat reflexes can negate a caster completely.

Or a couple of guys at range with bows and readied actions.

Just because magic is powerful doesn't mean they can't be taken down just as easily on their own as anyone else. DnD is above all else a collaborative game.

Besides, 'Always geek the Mage' doesn't everybody know that?
True. Maybe my time here has just kinda.... colored my thoughts on mages. Then again, the same people who have colored my views on mages could probably come up with ways to counter all those six ways to sunday.

[Tohsaka Rin]

Not to be rude, but that doesn't matter unless you frequently start your campaigns/players off at levels higher than 1.

Because you don't live very long on your own in the adventuring business without your party. Sure, at level 10 you could walk all over the average encounter solo, but that doesn't do much to help you at level 2, now does it?

[Kelb_Panthera]

Hmmm..... midgard dwarves would be interesting. Definitely corners the magic item market.

But even lower tier casters can still invalidate the skill checks that a non-caster could bring to the party. Like I mentioned earlier, any caster capable of casting fly invalidates a jump check, or a climb check. any caster capable of casting knock negates anyone who invested in disable device/open lock.

hell, any caster capable of casting Summon Monster can almost completely negate the rest of their party.

I see what's going on here. Classic overcompensation.

A couple of things. First, fly invalidates -one- jump check for the wizard and nobody else. Unless of course he's willing to cast it 4 times. Four third level spells to avoid a hole in the ground seems a bit much if you ask me. Climb checks run similarly. A smart party will send up one PC with a rope and drop the rope to the others but that only works if A) they have enough rope and B) there are no hazardous conditions to complicate things like enemies or bad weather. Overland flight is a slightly different matter but it's a personal spell. Only the wizard himself benefits. Presumably everyone needs to get past these obstacles so something that only benefits the wizard doesn't negate anything and for regular fly all it takes is multiple obstacles with too little time to take a day between them.

Knock has rather stiff limits. It's utterly useless against portcullis gates, locking bars, knotted cable, and anything with more than just two locks on it. If you're casting it from an item instead of a slot, it also has a limit of 30 square feet of portal. That's an average sized door. That massive stone gate into the dwarven stronghold; way too big. The french door into the manor house; just a little too big but still too big.

Summon monster. Are you kidding? They're poor combatants, they're worse skill monkeys, and they're utterly crap casters. They're useful to have around, sure, but they're not even -close- to being a replacement party.

Internet forums are prone to hyperbole. It's much more useful to be aware of what spells can actually do than to simply take internet chatter as fact.

[Kazyan]

Then again, the same people who have colored my views on mages could probably come up with ways to counter all those six ways to sunday.

Arrows? Just take total cover behind some of your Ice Assassins.

[sleepyphoenixx]

So suddenly everyone is a gish of some sort. Long-term buffs don't care about casting time, and they're usually superior to non-magical warriors (excepting maybe ToB) in combat while still getting the non-combat benefits of divination spells, things like Simulacrum/Planar Binding, Teleport, etc.

The only thing this eliminates is magical BFC and blasting, of which only the first is a serious blow to casters combat strength.

As for the "eliminating all skill checks" issue, that's pretty much pure theory. A wizard that spends a spell slot on everything that others solve with a skill check can't do anything else unless your players practice a 15 minute adventure day (something i have never actually seen in a game). If that's a problem you're facing add time constraints that prevent the party from resting every 15 minutes.

Sure, he can circumvent some skill checks, but every one costs him a spell slot that could be better used for something else. You can't solve every little challenge with magic and still expect to have enough magic left until the mid-high levels, and by that time a climb or jump check is hardly a level appropiate obstacle anyway.

[ryu]

And anyone in melee range with combat reflexes can negate a caster completely.

Or a couple of guys at range with bows and readied actions.

Just because magic is powerful doesn't mean they can't be taken down just as easily on their own as anyone else. DnD is above all else a collaborative game.

Besides, 'Always geek the Mage' doesn't everybody know that?

1: Abrupt jaunt
2: Tower shield total cover option and abuse hide checks. Suddenly invisible. Alternatively any of several spells which grant lasting cover effects after abusing abrupt jaunt to guarantee a single safe casting. At that point proceed to win the ranged fight with impunity.

All solutions available at very low level especially if we're willing to wand, and with near total success odds rather than just a chance at success.

[Heliomance]

And anyone in melee range with combat reflexes can negate a caster completely.


Casting defensively is a thing. Not even a hard thing. So are five foot steps.

[Zanos]

Casting defensively is a thing. Not even a hard thing. So are five foot steps.
Casting defensively doesn't help against the monster readying an action to hit you when you cast a spell (forcing a concentration check you probably can't beat due to the damage), and 5ft stops don't help against anything with reach, which is most melee monsters. Smart casters put ranks in tumble and get a magic item so they can make the flat DC. The smartest casters you'll never fight, instead they send an army of Mind Raped Ice Assassin Aleax Deities.

In my experience casters are only unkillable god kings who invalidate the rest of the party when the player of that character is actively trying to be a jerk. In every game I've played it's been mostly fine to have wizards next to martial characters, although we do normally use ToB for the martial guys.

[heavyfuel]

I've played with a similar houserule in the past, and while I didn't mind it then (mostly because I wasn't using spells in combat anyway) the major problem with it is that it makes mid-op casters anti-fun, while high-op casters are unaffected.

You can still get loads of minions with spells, as well as keep your versatility out of combat which is what high-op casters are all about, but if you want to blast someone with a fireball, the battle will be over by the time you finish casting. In 3.5, where quick battles take at least half an hour, and long ones can take up to 4 or 5 hours, having one fourth the amount of turns as everyone else isn't enjoyable.

[Eldan]

The question is: what do casters do in combat? Combat in D&D, at least as far as I know it, only seems to come in two varities. They are either over once the caster casts the right spell, or they are long, boring, endless grinds of HP against HP. With this rule, the caster (after about level 3, when a simple crossbow doesn't contribute much anymore) can stand aside while combat happens. Either to do nothing, or to spend ten rounds preparing the spell that will win it while the rest of the party keeps the monsters busy. Given that combat can easily last half an hour or an hour, that would be, for me at least, the moment when I'd take out a book and stop paying attention.

Of course, there are ways around it. I'd be sorely tempted to prepare nothing but mobility and stealth spells and just move the entire party around every combat. More so than usual, I mean. Or start to optimize, summon a few critters, buff myself and them to the heavens and be a better fighter than the fighter.

[Heliomance]

Casting defensively doesn't help against the monster readying an action to hit you when you cast a spell (forcing a concentration check you probably can't beat due to the damage), and 5ft stops don't help against anything with reach, which is most melee monsters.

In seven years of gaming, I have never seen that happen. Ever. Readying an action means you don't get to full attack.

[Zanos]

In seven years of gaming, I have never seen that happen. Ever.
I humbly retract all my past statements that don't conform to your experiences.

Readying an action means you don't get to full attack.
Stopping someone from casting is generally better than full-attacking. How much better a full attack is than a single attack at doing that depends on level and how much charging shenanigans your DM is willing to put up with.

[heavyfuel]

In seven years of gaming, I have never seen that happen. Ever. Readying an action means you don't get to full attack.

Works best in lower levels where you only get one attack anyway, or with Standar Action ToB maneuvers

[sleepyphoenixx]

Casting time has very little bearing on how interrupting casting with readied actions works, so i fail to see how it's relevant.
Also, with casting times of 1 round or longer it becomes absolutely useless since you can just attack normally and still force a concentration check. In fact you can attack several times before the spell completes, with every hit forcing a check.
With every spell having a long casting time there is no longer a need to ready an action to interrupt.

It becomes more important for casters to cast in cover and/or break LoS when casting times are longer. Not that it's in any way relevant since casting in combat is a hilarious waste of time with the OPs proposed changes.
No combat in which a first level spell would provide a meaningful advantage is going to last 10 rounds, with the increased casting time for higher levels making them even more useless.

In short, casting becomes an out of combat tool. Spellcasters that want to contribute use long-term spells that can be used before the encounter starts. Gishes, Buffers, Necromancers and similar options work fine with relatively minor adjustments in spell selection.
BFC casters, blasters and summoners cease to exist as viable specializations because by the time they do their thing combat is usually over.

[jedipotter]

You might as well just ban spellcasters. They will be next to useless. A casting time of just one minute(lots of rounds) means that they will never cast a spell in combat. And it's only worse then never for 4 or 5 minutes or more.

And your waiting time does not really work out of combat. Ok, the spell will take ''one minute'' and the skill takes ''six seconds'', but how long do both take in real time? One second. Like the play just says ''ok, we wait around a minute for the spell to be cast, and the...." The same way they could say ''we wait for an hour'' in one second.


I find it better to just alter the spells, and make the world tougher.

[torrasque666]

So suddenly everyone is a gish of some sort. Long-term buffs don't care about casting time, and they're usually superior to non-magical warriors (excepting maybe ToB) in combat while still getting the non-combat benefits of divination spells, things like Simulacrum/Planar Binding, Teleport, etc.
I'd think this would break most gishes as well. At least ones who don't use Persist Spell(Which is actually banned in my games). Most buffs have time listed in minutes per level. By the time a caster is done buffing themselves up, the first few buffs have already worn off.

[Ruethgar]

One E6 character I came up with used the Libris Mortis feats Enduring Life and Lasting Life to be able to cast Whispering Way spells(neg level on cast). My brother the DM liked the mechanic so much that he made a world where all spells were Whispering Way meaning you had to be undead or go through a lot of training to be able to cast spells without certain death. There are also the wizard flaws which, if made standard, could lessen caster's ability to effectively cast in combat. As I recall, your dex drops to 0 and it takes at least a full round to cast spells with one of the flaws.

You could just ban all magic using base classes. It would still be possible through heavy feat investment to cast spells via Magical Training, Precocious Apprentice, Bloodlines, Extra Spell and the Sanctum/Krau/Earth method of increasing potential level(though if you do this I would suggest letting "casters" take the Generic Expert class so they aren't totally gimped).

[torrasque666]

You could just ban all magic using base classes. It would still be possible through heavy feat investment to cast spells via Magical Training, Precocious Apprentice, Bloodlines, Extra Spell and the Sanctum/Krau/Earth method of increasing potential level(though if you do this I would suggest letting "casters" take the Generic Expert class so they aren't totally gimped).
You did notice that I use bans both ways right? If I ban base casting classes, then that means no Wizard/Sorcerer/Bard/Cleric NPCs. That means no access to things like resurrection.
What i'm basically trying to do is gimp casters to the point that they really only exist to sell spellcasting services.

And Generic Expert is only supposed to be used in games that don't have the normal classes at all. All the Generic Classes are.

[Flickerdart]

If you want magic to work as out-of-combat rituals, play 4e or use Incantations from UA. Doing hideously long casting times works exactly for two kinds of spells - long-duration spells, and long-duration spells that can be ended prematurely for a cool benefit. The latter are very rare, and the former are a major part of the wizard's power. Who cares that Planar Binding takes 7 minutes to cast if you score yourself a pet angel for a week? Why does it matter if it takes 4 minutes to Animate Dead when doing so will give you zombies that stick around forever?

Making spell casting times longer than combats only hoses novice players who just wanted to run around throwing fireballs. If you have a problem with Knock, fix Knock, instead of breaking the entire system.

[Kelb_Panthera]

You did notice that I use bans both ways right? If I ban base casting classes, then that means no Wizard/Sorcerer/Bard/Cleric NPCs. That means no access to things like resurrection.
What i'm basically trying to do is gimp casters to the point that they really only exist to sell spellcasting services.

And Generic Expert is only supposed to be used in games that don't have the normal classes at all. All the Generic Classes are.

The healer and adept say "hi."

Literally everything a T1/2 character can do can be done by at least one other class at T3 or lower. Bards, incidentally, are T3 and not usually a problem unless they prestige into sublime chord and become a sorcerer+. A lot of what the high tier classes do can be covered even by non-casters with the right PrC options.

Eliminating -all- casting classes is probably a bit extreme but the list casters (Dread necro, warmage, beguiler) and the healer are all full casters that get 9th level spells and have to really actively try to break a game. The adept and magewright (ECS) can cover most of your NPC spellcasting services needs unless you need something really specific.

I get what you're trying to do but you're reaching too far, IMO. Worse, you're reaching too far because of a fear that isn't necessarily warranted. Have your players ever actually -done- any of those things you're concerned about?

[torrasque666]

To be honest, no. Those who I am preparing to play with have never played D&D in their lives and I wouldn't implement this on them. However, I frequently play on roll20 and as such have a difficult time gauging the actual experience level of players who would like to join me. That is why I am trying to figure out ways to nix the magic system without truly nixing it.

[Flickerdart]

That is why I am trying to figure out ways to nix the magic system without truly nixing it.
You do this by fixing the spells. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with spell casting times, or spells per day, or spells known. None of those are why spellcasting is powerful. Every week, someone comes in with a similar bandaid fix and the answer is always the same - unless you do the legwork, you're just breaking it more.

[Kelb_Panthera]

To be honest, no. Those who I am preparing to play with have never played D&D in their lives and I wouldn't implement this on them. However, I frequently play on roll20 and as such have a difficult time gauging the actual experience level of players who would like to join me. That is why I am trying to figure out ways to nix the magic system without truly nixing it.

Then just do it. When you put your game up on roll 20 just put "Caster players need not apply" in the header and don't worry about it.

Low-magic (as in low-powered casters, not magic item rarity) campaigns and adventures can be fun once in a while but you don't get there by nerfing all casters into uselessness.

My go-to move for a "low magic" adventure (I rarely do whole campaigns this way) is to declare that if anyone wants to play a vancian caster their choices are adept for divine magic or magewright for arcane. Then I add the requisite spells for the prestigious versions of bard, paladin, and ranger to their lists and that's that.

[jedipotter]

You do this by fixing the spells. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with spell casting times, or spells per day, or spells known. None of those are why spellcasting is powerful. Every week, someone comes in with a similar bandaid fix and the answer is always the same - unless you do the legwork, you're just breaking it more.

Right, fix the spells. It's not as hard as it sounds.

1.Make some universal magic rules. This is the easy way to fix tones of spells. For example one of mine is a [teleport] type spell of under 4th level is line of sight only. See, that fixes all the low level teleport spells with one rule. Another great thing to remove is all the absolutes. Way too many spells like knock, Death ward, Freedom of movement and others are absolute. Making them more limited is the way to go. For example, my version of knock says The spell gives a flat +10 bonus to the casters Open Locks skill or Strength Check, to overcome the Open Lock DC of the lock or the Strength check DC of a stuck door. (and you can make the open lock check untrained)

2.Add downsides. This is something really missing from 3X/P magic. One of my big downsides is a person might loose their mind in a polymorphed form.

3.Finally go spell by spell to fix anything you don't like. Some spells just need a rewrite. Like Alter Self and Gate.

[Flickerdart]

Right, fix the spells. It's not as hard as it sounds.
Nope.


1.Make some universal magic rules.
Literally the thing I just said not to do.


2.Add downsides.
If I had a penny for every time we've already been over this, it would collapse the world copper economy.


3.Finally go spell by spell to fix anything you don't like.
Pretty much the only meaningful solution.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Right, fix the spells. It's not as hard as it sounds.

1.Make some universal magic rules. This is the easy way to fix tones of spells. For example one of mine is a [teleport] type spell of under 4th level is line of sight only. See, that fixes all the low level teleport spells with one rule. Another great thing to remove is all the absolutes. Way too many spells like knock, Death ward, Freedom of movement and others are absolute. Making them more limited is the way to go. For example, my version of knock says The spell gives a flat +10 bonus to the casters Open Locks skill or Strength Check, to overcome the Open Lock DC of the lock or the Strength check DC of a stuck door. (and you can make the open lock check untrained)

2.Add downsides. This is something really missing from 3X/P magic. One of my big downsides is a person might loose their mind in a polymorphed form.

3.Finally go spell by spell to fix anything you don't like. Some spells just need a rewrite. Like Alter Self and Gate.

Take this with a grain of salt. It represents a somewhat extreme viewpoint.

There's really nothing wrong with teleportation spells. Teleporting beyond an obstacle that you can't see beyond entails no small amount of risk. Anything from directly hazardous conditions such as open flames to an unknown number of enemies to overshooting into solid objects. (What, you don't occasionally put a locked door in an otherwise solid wall as a red herring?)

There are also far fewer absolute spells than are generally credited. I already pointed out the flaws in knock for example. There's also the fact that most such spells either can't be shared or shared easily. If you're aware of your players' capabilities then it's not at all difficult to avoid throwing challenges against their strengths too consistently. Having deathward in your spellbook isn't much help when you didn't prepare it and suddenly there are shadows popping out of the walls.

[torrasque666]

Take this with a grain of salt. It represents a somewhat extreme viewpoint. Oh I know. After all, he is the Great Adversary of Rudisplorking.

And I did come up with a few attempts at nerfing the big game breakers a while back. Can be found here. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?381981-Balancing-the-PHB-spell-list) Hell, I think its even still within the limits to not be a necro to post in.

[Tohsaka Rin]

As always, the easiest solution is 'if you think you're going to have a problem with a player, TALK to them'.

Probably also the best one.

If you want to run a game with less casting, ask your players to only take a few caster levels, tops. If you want them to not use certain spells, ask them to not take those spells.

Rather than gut the game in a knee-jerk reaction, just ASK your players. I find that in most cases, a player is willing to work WITH the DM, rather than against them. Why?

Because we all just wanna have fun, playing a game together.

[Knaight]

Still..... doesn't seem enough for what I'm trying to do. I see magic as something that is raw and powerful. Something that needs time to prepare and control without mishap. While still allowing for lower level magical play through the use of items. Basically I kinda want to shut T1s down but I'm also a person who applys bans both ways. Bans to them apply to myself as well when I DM. I can't outright ban T1s because without them, no magical items. But I also don't enjoy the fact that most skills and abilities of lower tier characters can be negated through magic. Chasm? Fly. Locked Door? Knock.
High Wall? Levitate. Hostile Guard? Charm. Charm didn't work? Dominate. Contain Prisoners? Flesh-to-Stone and a Portable Hole.

The issue here is simply that you're trying to do something that D&D isn't made for. Battlefield spells are a very large part of magic, and they don't work well with a 10 round casting time as combats also tend to be very short - plus, it's as boring as it gets. D&D is also very combat based, so having casters be less useful in combat isn't all that great. Outside of combat, 1 minute often isn't enough to cause serious issues.

In short, you're going to want drastic changes. Outright banning tier 1 classes is fine, the Adept and Warlock pretty much have magic item making under control, and the Adept is a spell caster perfectly capable of keeping up with any martial class. Another option would be going through the spell list, and kicking large portions of it into ritual territory - where the spell takes several hours, and it's really obvious that you're casting it to anyone around. Then, leave the spells that need to be fast (e.g. feather fall) as is.

Then there's the matter of combat magic. One option would be to introduce some sort of magical saturation effect - higher level spells need the immediate area to already be saturated with magic. To cast a second level spell, someone in the fight needs to have already cast a first, to cast a third someone needs to have cast a second, etc. If a round goes by without a spell cast, the saturation decreases by one. Maybe magic items can passively boost it around them to some extent (e.g. someone with a +5 sword kicks the starting level to 5). The point is, there are hefty revisions necessary to get it to work.

[torrasque666]

Hmm.... true. I was also considering tacking on a type of ability burn that can't be negated to casting, because in a lot of stories(or perhaps just the ones i tend to like) magic tends to have a wear on the body, or at least higher level magic does. A lot of stories have the casters who get tired after casting either a bunch of minor spells or one big one(a game i played in once used something like this, we used the spell points variant and when you were below 1/2 you were fatigued, 1/4 and you were exhausted. 0 and you were KO'd.) So I was thinking either fatiguing/exhausting them, or tacking on either a con or casting stat burn for spells, possibly 1/2 spell level rounded down. So that repeatedly casting powerful magics could actually kill you. Some sort of penalty.

[Knaight]

Hmm.... true. I was also considering tacking on a type of ability burn that can't be negated to casting, because in a lot of stories(or perhaps just the ones i tend to like) magic tends to have a wear on the body, or at least higher level magic does. A lot of stories have the casters who get tired after casting either a bunch of minor spells or one big one(a game i played in once used something like this, we used the spell points variant and when you were below 1/2 you were fatigued, 1/4 and you were exhausted. 0 and you were KO'd.) So I was thinking either fatiguing/exhausting them, or tacking on either a con or casting stat burn for spells, possibly 1/2 spell level rounded down. So that repeatedly casting powerful magics could actually kill you. Some sort of penalty.

This sort of thing can also work, but it's another example where there's a great deal fo work involved getting it working well. If the magic system had been built around it in the first place it works beautifully, but importing it to a system which was built around tiers of spell slots tends to be sloppy unless it's a very thorough, rather large change. Doing what you want to do involves getting into lots of homebrew or just switching systems entirely.

[jedipotter]

Literally the thing I just said not to do.

Yea, we don't agree...shocking.



If I had a penny for every time we've already been over this, it would collapse the world copper economy.

Though it always works....


Take this with a grain of salt. It represents a somewhat extreme viewpoint.

Salty Extreme! Yum...sounds like a new kind of snack food....maybe salty extreme Dortios!


A lot of stories have the casters who get tired after casting....Some sort of penalty.

This is very hard to do in D&D. The rules just are not made for lasting negative effects. The same way character's don't limp around when they are wounded.

First off, you need to be careful not to make it too weak. If it's just -1 to skill checks it's useless. On the other hand if it's 10D10 points of damage per spell level, it's way too much.

And you need to make it somehow not be overly annoying to keep track of and apply.

And make it hard to get rid of, or they will just get rid of it in a round.

[torrasque666]

And make it hard to get rid of, or they will just get rid of it in a round.
And that was where Ablity Burn comes in. Ability burn is not damage or drain, and thus restoration cannot get rid of it. Ability burn even calls out that it can't be magically or psionically healed.

[jedipotter]

And that was where Ablity Burn comes in. Ability burn is not damage or drain, and thus restoration cannot get rid of it. Ability burn even calls out that it can't be magically or psionically healed.

Ok, but then your at the other end of the spectrum.

A spellcaster casts a couple spells...and gets ability burned. Then a couple more and a couple more. Soon enough they are badly ability burned. So now they have to run around the rest of the adventure day and not cast spells or start to whine ''lets rest guys''. And then they only get a point back, so it's ''lets rest a week''......

It can quickly make a game take forever...adventure for fifteen minutes, rest for a week or two, adventure for fifteen minutes, rest for a week or two. Characters would be old by the time they did even one quest...lol

[Knaight]

Ok, but then your at the other end of the spectrum.

A spellcaster casts a couple spells...and gets ability burned. Then a couple more and a couple more. Soon enough they are badly ability burned. So now they have to run around the rest of the adventure day and not cast spells or start to whine ''lets rest guys''. And then they only get a point back, so it's ''lets rest a week''......

It can quickly make a game take forever...adventure for fifteen minutes, rest for a week or two, adventure for fifteen minutes, rest for a week or two. Characters would be old by the time they did even one quest...lol

Given that this exact sort of mechanic with penalties every bit as brutal are all over the place in non-D&D systems and completely functional in it, I don't buy it. Maybe it won't work too well with the assumed encounter frequencies in D&D, but 4+ fights every day is ridiculous to begin with, so that's not too huge a change.

[Zakerst]

Well I first problem I see with your solution is that it does nothing to psionics (if you use it/them?) nor spell like abilities. Now I've read enough to see that your object is to "gimp casters to the point that they really only exist to sell spellcasting services." one problem here is that none of the casters should ever reach the level where they can cast any of these spells.

I'm not really sure why you feel the need to gimp them so much, unless your games have been vastly different than most I've seen or heard of it doesn't seem like such nerfs are really needed. And against some enemies magic really is needed to fight them, killing a toll is going to be neigh impossible if you weren't expecting one, not having dimensional anchor means fighting anything that can teleport around, plane shift, ect, is not happening. Likewise its not going to shut down Gate and planer binding which are real game breakers, not to mention Druids are still going to be two fighters++, however most of the other T1s and T2s will seem completely unpalatable (which seems to be the goal).
Gishes will be neigh unplayable in most forms (but not all) and warlocks may take center stage as blasting goes. And I must say again this doesn't do anything to psionics unless you make it apply through the transparency at which point those classes are also effectively banned. Likewise Rangers and Palis are just fighters with some flavor as they'll never cast their spells in all likelihood.

Then there is the issue of that guy who does nothing but cast explosive runes on letters, you know the one, yeah his kind are now optimally using their time. Another note is that you cannot field any spell casters of your own since this "cuts both ways" however the party likely wont see of feel this effect if they're encountering anything with SLAs they'll just feel like they're getting thrown to the magical Übermensch, that just happen to not need to "cast" their spells. Without ready access to break enchantment and the like enemy mind control is a real danger even more so than usual.

As a side note they'll still break the economy if allowed, ex create water, water to acid, bottle and sell acid. or the infamous walls.


In short it seems to me that either a general agreement to not try and break the game would serve what I think your intended purpose is (not having a broken game where spell casters are the alpha and omega), or just restricting the players to not playing spell casting classes.

[Flickerdart]

Though it always works....
We've long since established that you're something of an unreliable narrator due to a lack of empathy, and understanding of reality in general. I would say I take what you say with a grain of salt, but the amount of salt I'd need in the grain would require all the salt in the world, and send the salt economy right after the copper one.

Then I will use my salt and copper monopoly to rule the world.

[Endarire]

If magic is still difficult to achieve, but still achievable, but have you gained by adding unnecessary hoops to jump through?

If the prevalence of magic is problemetic, how about using 5E's Concentration mechanic which limits each creature to one Concentration spell at a time? Add a Concentration tag for pretty much every spell with a non-instantaneous duration and you have seriously limited the power of magic while keeping all magical effects in place and available to use for all units - GM and PC - just fewer active at a time.

torr: What are your top 5 priorities in your campaign? These will help you determine what needs fixing, if anything, to ensure you get what you want, and so do the rest of your players!

[jedipotter]

We've long since established that you're something of an unreliable narrator due to a lack of empathy, and understanding of reality in general. I would say I take what you say with a grain of salt, but the amount of salt I'd need in the grain would require all the salt in the world, and send the salt economy right after the copper one.

Then I will use my salt and copper monopoly to rule the world.

Your in luck, I live right next to one of the biggest salt mines in the world! It's an awesome place! Take the tour.....you get to go seven miles underground where they are mining the salt.

[torrasque666]

torr: What are your top 5 priorities in your campaign? These will help you determine what needs fixing, if anything, to ensure you get what you want, and so do the rest of your players!
Mostly I want:

A good story
All of my players to have fun
Low-to-non magic cast
Players to still be able to have the items that may become necessary to contribute
Skill checks to actually have meaning

Am I asking too much? Or am I just going to be directed to 4e? Because I don't understand 4e nor do I have any real inclination to learn. Well, that's not true. I've learned enough to help my DM in another group convert most of his terminology and checks to 3.5.

[Tohsaka Rin]

Your in luck, I live right next to one of the biggest salt mines in the world! It's an awesome place! Take the tour.....you get to go seven miles underground where they are mining the salt.

I saw that on Good Eats! Nifty place.

For the record, Flickerdart, Jedipotter's uh... Infamy, mainly stemmed from apparently DMing for some of the worst players in the world, short of the Brazillian Death Squad. (No offense to anyone from Brazil, the Death Squad was a story about... Eh, just google it)

Why do I say this? Because the suggestion to just nerf some of the problem spells seems a lot better than wholesale crushing magic into a ball.

Remember folks, just because you disagree with someone in one thread, doesn't mean they can't be all sagely in another.

EDIT - I just want to reenforce what I've said before: TALK TO YOUR PLAYERS! Asking them if they'll agree to low-to-no casters IN the party, while still having ACCESS TO enchanters for gear and stuff is such a STUPIDLY easy thing to do. ASK THEM. AAASSSK THEEEMMM! The worst that they can say is no.

And if they say yes, you've just SOLVED. ALL. YOUR. PROBLEMS.

[Darkweave31]

I can still invite the party to my private resort demiplane while I have an army of simulacra do whatever it was we were supposed to do. All it does is make spellcasters unplayable at low to mid optimization while only slightly inconveniencing high optimization.

[Svata]

In the "something is killing arcanists when they cast, its your job to fix it" game, A (rather mad) evil druid is behind it. They see it as something that defiles the natural order. I use Con burn equal to spell level+2d6, later progressing to level+2d8 (because the arcanablight is growing in power) every time an arcane caster casts or someone uses a SLA not granted from race/template.

[torrasque666]

In the "something is killing arcanists when they cast, its your job to fix it" game, A (rather mad) evil druid is behind it. They see it as something that defiles the natural order. I use Con burn equal to spell level+2d6, later progressing to level+2d8 (because the arcanablight is growing in power) every time an arcane caster casts or someone uses a SLA not granted from race/template.
While I like that it kinda keeps casters away from anywhere near a battlefield, lvl+2d6 seems kinda, i dunno, harsh. thats potentially 7 CON burn from a level 1 spell.

I like it.

[jedipotter]

Am I asking too much? .

Not at all. If you don't want to do magic fixes, there is another great way to get everything you want in 3.5E


High Magic.

Just flip everything over. Make magic super common. This really can nerf cast magic as everything is magical. But it can boost skill checks at the same time.

For example, my game has Transplate. It's a very weak shale like rock that is anti magical. And it extends that around itself a bit. So an door with a trnasplate core would be immune to magic....but you could still pick the lock the mundane way.

[With a box]

Just remove those spellcasters and bring a lot of artificier

[Knaight]

Mostly I want:

A good story
All of my players to have fun
Low-to-non magic cast
Players to still be able to have the items that may become necessary to contribute
Skill checks to actually have meaning

Am I asking too much? Or am I just going to be directed to 4e? Because I don't understand 4e nor do I have any real inclination to learn. Well, that's not true. I've learned enough to help my DM in another group convert most of his terminology and checks to 3.5.

There are a lot of games that aren't 4e which you could be directed to here. Even in the 1980's there were fairly major non-D&D games (GURPS, Traveller, possibly World of Darkness if that wasn't in the 90's), now there's a whole bunch of them, plenty of which fit your criteria. If "having the items that may become necessary to contribute" can be met by a system not actually requiring magic items in the first place, then you have tons more. You're looking at fairly dramatic changes that require a fair amount of work, they're only really worth it if there's something you really like about 3.5 in particular that you'd miss in other systems.

Plus, if having next to no magic cast is a goal, 4e is very much not the thing for the job. At will magical powers are something basically every magic using class has in that system.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Mostly I want:

A good story
All of my players to have fun
Low-to-non magic cast
Players to still be able to have the items that may become necessary to contribute
Skill checks to actually have meaning

Am I asking too much?

Not at all.

The first two are on you and your players. There's absolutely -no- game design step that you can make that will guarantee them. Campaign and adventure design are their own animals to be tamed before worrying about game design.

I'm assuming that by "cast" you're referring to the party and/or maybe the named NPC's in the campaign? That doesn't require any rules modification either. Simply say to your players "Hey, I'd like to get away from casters for this campaign. I'd appreciate it if you guys would stick to partial and non-casting classes." If you don't mind tipping your hand a little you could include "I'll be doing the same for the antagonists," to reassure them of any concerns about caster supremacy biting them in the butt.

You don't -have- to justify the existence of magic items in treasure piles or the market unless you want to. As long as they can get their shinies the players will probably be content not to ask.

Skill checks aren't entirely replaceable by spells anyway. Asking the players to avoid dedicated casters should be enough by itself.