Would This Bring Casters In-Line?

[PsyBomb]

So, in order to prevent further derailment of the New Year's Resolution thread...

The basic idea is this: instead of the primary casters (and other spellcasting-ish methods, like Manifesting), we end up with 6th-level progression (PF Bard is the best example I know of) being the norm with a series of specialized classes dedicated to 1-2 schools of magic each. These go beyond mere Specialization, the classes cannot learn spells outside of their specializations except in rare circumstances. Think 3.5 Beguiler/Dread Necro/Warmage for examples.

7th-level spells exist and are accessible by players, but only by taking a PrC that is VERY focused on spellcasting to its full conclusion. This class would basically have the chassis of the 3.5 Sorc, the only good thing being enhanced spellcasting. 8ths and 9ths exist only as a sidebar, to give the DM ideas for major threats.

This discussion applies equally to PF and 3.X, though I will admit to being better with PF and thus will draw most of my responses from there.

These are only the roughest of the rough for notes, but it's all about putting the ideas out there.

[Vhaidara]

Oh, I think you mixed ideas.

The original was that you would have the specialized classes that went to 9ths (Beguiler, Warmage, Dread Necro, Seer, Shifter, Summoner), and then a generalist caster (Wizard) who went to 6ths on Bard casting progression, but maintained the ability to learn everything on their spell list.

As far as the idea of a crappy PrC that get you 7ths, that I agree could work on the chassis you proposed. I was thinking a 5 level PrC that gave you 7ths at 1, 8ths at 3, and 9ths at 5, which required 6ths to enter and cost you -2 to a physical ability score each level.

[Jack_Simth]

There's a problem (can be overcome): The game expects the party to have certain 'fix it' spells available by a certain level. Stone to Flesh, Restoration, Remove Curse, Break Enchantment, that sort of thing.

If you put the full casters that can get those on a limited progression, then you're no longer getting the 'fix it' spells on the expected schedule, and you'll need to re-do most of the CRs.
If you make one of your specialized casters get that sort of spell... someone's taking a hit for the team, as playing a band-aid box that can't do anything of note in combat is about as dull as used dishwater.

[StoneCipher]

There's nothing you can do to bring casters in line other than pretty much giving them a handpicked list of spells that they can choose from that wont completely break something. You want casters to be immensely useful without going way over the top like making their own plane of existence. There are plenty of good spells 0-9 that are essential to late game parties and to deny those just so that mundanes can feel better about themselves is just pointless. The problem is creative abuse of spells to make yourself unstoppable. That and crafting truckloads of magic items.

[Honest Tiefling]

Odd idea, but I'll toss it out: Spellcasters get 7-9th level spell slots. They just don't get the spells. No need to muck with progression, and feats like Split Slot suddenly get to be more interesting.

I'd say banning a few OP spells can't hurt.

[Troacctid]

Odd idea, but I'll toss it out: Spellcasters get 7-9th level spell slots. They just don't get the spells. No need to muck with progression, and feats like Split Slot suddenly get to be more interesting.

I'd say banning a few OP spells can't hurt.

This is the solution I like better. You can still use the tables from the book, so you don't have to muck around with homebrewing new progression tables for everyone.

It also gives more flexibility to casters who want to multiclass, since they can get all their spells in fewer levels.

[redwizard007]

This is the solution I like better. You can still use the tables from the book, so you don't have to muck around with homebrewing new progression tables for everyone.

It also gives more flexibility to casters who want to multiclass, since they can get all their spells in fewer levels.

The second part of this is an intriguing point that I've never considered before (or not noticed in "rebalancing threads.")

Over all the lack of top level spells and dropping things like polymorph seems like the most effective approach without major work.

[Belial_the_Leveler]

Does this seem fixed to you?


1) Caster casts "hold person".
2) Fighter fails will save.
3) Cleric slits his throat.



The only way to fix the balance is either to remove all effects except damage (let's call this the dumb or "4th Edition" way), or to give mundanes more effects than just damage, which is what ToB tried to do - except it didn't go far enough.

[Honest Tiefling]

I actually kinda like one thing 4th did, which was that you got a save each round for most effects.

[Belial_the_Leveler]

The 20th lvl fighter with his +14 will save in 3.5 will need 20 rounds to escape a DC 34 spell by the wizard. That's bad balance.

The fighter will also die vs the flying wizard because he can't overcome the spell the wizard is using to win the fight no matter how high his save is - because it isn't cast on him.

The fighter will also never win against the wizard if the wizard can teleport away from a losing fight then try again later or if the wizard is not even on the battlefield when fighting (i.e. sends minions or uses long-range magic). Eventually the wizard wins because he can't lose.



Those are the three basic problems on the direct combat side - instant win, mobility effects and remote combat. The wizard has all three of them and the fighter gets nothing to compensate.

[Extra Anchovies]

This would work a lot better for PF. Inquisitor, Warpriest, Hunter cover cleric and druid casting; OcA Occultist and Bard would cover wizard and, well, bard casting. Summoner would be banned. If you want a bloodline-type there's still Bloodrager, or you could 'brew up a 6ths-caster with a bloodline. The only thing left to do is reduce the level of the aforementioned sorts of fix-it spells, or avoid those monsters until players have those spells (and advance them to meet the party's level).

[Troacctid]

The 20th lvl fighter with his +14 will save in 3.5 will need 20 rounds to escape a DC 34 spell by the wizard. That's bad balance.

The fighter will also die vs the flying wizard because he can't overcome the spell the wizard is using to win the fight no matter how high his save is - because it isn't cast on him.

The fighter will also never win against the wizard if the wizard can teleport away from a losing fight then try again later or if the wizard is not even on the battlefield when fighting (i.e. sends minions or uses long-range magic). Eventually the wizard wins because he can't lose.



Those are the three basic problems on the direct combat side - instant win, mobility effects and remote combat. The wizard has all three of them and the fighter gets nothing to compensate.

Caster balance has nothing to do with who wins in a head-to-head fight. D&D is a cooperative game; PCs aren't fighting against each other. Casters are overpowered for a completely different set of reasons.

[Vhaidara]

First off, can we focus on discussing the idea mentioned in the OP? I don't think a single post, besides my first one, has actually been on that topic.


Those are the three basic problems on the direct combat side - instant win, mobility effects and remote combat. The wizard has all three of them and the fighter gets nothing to compensate.

The problem is that, aside from the first one, those are things that Wizards are supposed to be able to do. Flight and teleportation are staples of the genre.

Now, I will acknowledge that teleportation (non-local, so anything higher than Dimension Door, which is dropped to Close/Medium range) should never have a cast time lower than 1-10 minutes and cannot be avoided by things like Contingency (except by an ancient super magic, rumored and feared, called Plot)

But Flight is something that the wizard is supposed to have, and early, and he is supposed to be able to give it to the fighter. That's the problem with how you are looking at it: You are viewing DnD as a death match. One on one PvP, rather than a team effort. The fighter needs the Wizard to fly. The problem is that the Wizard is supposed to need the fighter to tank and do damage, which the fighter can't do.

[Jack_Simth]

First off, can we focus on discussing the idea mentioned in the OP? I don't think a single post, besides my first one, has actually been on that topic.

So... pointing out a consequence of delayed spell progression (my first post) and some potential steps to mitigate that consequence, is not on topic?


The problem is that, aside from the first one, those are things that Wizards are supposed to be able to do. Flight and teleportation are staples of the genre.

Now, I will acknowledge that teleportation (non-local, so anything higher than Dimension Door, which is dropped to Close/Medium range) should never have a cast time lower than 1-10 minutes and cannot be avoided by things like Contingency (except by an ancient super magic, rumored and feared, called Plot)

But Flight is something that the wizard is supposed to have, and early, and he is supposed to be able to give it to the fighter. That's the problem with how you are looking at it: You are viewing DnD as a death match. One on one PvP, rather than a team effort. The fighter needs the Wizard to fly. The problem is that the Wizard is supposed to need the fighter to tank and do damage, which the fighter can't do.
So really, what we need to do is cut down on the Wizard's options to avoid needing a Fighter as a tank and striker (likewise a Rogue as a skillmonkey and striker) while boosting the Fighter's ability to tank and deal damage (and possibly the rogue's ability to skillmonkey and strike).

... which points at categories of of things to limit on the Full Caster side:
1) Minion spells (Summon X, the Planar Binding/Ally line, long-term enchantment, Simulacrum, Animate Dead, et cetera) as they negate the need for a dedicated player tank.
2) Front-line enabling spells (strong defences such as Mirror Image, Blur, Stoneskin, Polymorph, Displacement, et cetera; strong personal combat buffs such as Polymorph, Transformation, Righteous Might, Divine Power, et cetera) as they let the caster play the tank.
3) Ranged save-or-lose spells (Glitterdust, Web, Stinking Cloud, Black Tentacles, et cetera) and ranged direct damage spells (Fireball, Lightning Bolt, Cone of Cold, Flame Strike, Scorching Ray, et cetera) as such effects let the caster avoid being threatened while still being a major threat.
4) Skill replacement spells (Knock, Find Traps, Divine Insight, Guidance of the Avatar, Invisibility, Spider Climb, Fly, Clairaudiance/Clairvoyance, et cetera) as those replace the skill based classes.

... while pointing at categories of things to boost on the Fighter side:
1) The ability to soak attacks
2) The ability to kill things
3) The ability to draw fire

... and things to boost on the skillmonkey side:
1) The ability to kill things
2) The ability to deal with skill challenges.

The real question, of course, being 'how to go about it?' - if you go too far, you simply end up with the opposite problem (casters are useless). Hmm.

[Vhaidara]

So... pointing out a consequence of delayed spell progression (my first post) and some potential steps to mitigate that consequence, is not on topic?

Except scrolls/wands/potions all still come online at the same time. As far as CR needing to be rebalanced, that's already true. And the new casters would be warmage/beguiler/dread necromancer style: they know their entire list and cast spontaneously from it.


So really, what we need to do is cut down on the Wizard's options to avoid needing a Fighter as a tank and striker (likewise a Rogue as a skillmonkey and striker) while boosting the Fighter's ability to tank and deal damage (and possibly the rogue's ability to skillmonkey and strike).

Or at least ensure that the Wizard, while able to do those things, isn't as good as the original at them (currently they are better). And the other side is limiting them to how much of it they can do.



1) Minion spells (Summon X, the Planar Binding/Ally line, long-term enchantment, Simulacrum, Animate Dead, et cetera) as they negate the need for a dedicated player tank.

So most of these would be restricted to a single class that does little else.


2) Front-line enabling spells (strong defences such as Mirror Image, Blur, Stoneskin, Polymorph, Displacement, et cetera; strong personal combat buffs such as Polymorph, Transformation, Righteous Might, Divine Power, et cetera) as they let the caster play the tank.

Again, rather than remove, restrict to a single class. This one would be more of a gish class, designed to fill the fighters role more than the wizard role. Something like an Alchemist base, since they would both focus on self-buffs.


3) Ranged save-or-lose spells (Glitterdust, Web, Stinking Cloud, Black Tentacles, et cetera)

Okay, on these you are correct, though BFC is generally the job of magic, not mundane


and ranged direct damage spells (Fireball, Lightning Bolt, Cone of Cold, Flame Strike, Scorching Ray, et cetera)

Blasting, outside of mailman levels, does not compare to the damage of a mundane. These don't need to be touched.



4) Skill replacement spells (Knock, Find Traps, Divine Insight, Guidance of the Avatar, Invisibility, Spider Climb, Fly, Clairaudiance/Clairvoyance, et cetera) as those replace the skill based classes.

Aside from Fly, I agree. As stated before, the Flight is a staple. Taking that away actually hurts Fighters more than leaving it hurts Rogues, since the Fighters can't reach half of their enemies now.


... while pointing at categories of things to boost on the Fighter side:
1) The ability to soak attacks
2) The ability to kill things
3) The ability to draw fire

This is the most relevant one, in my opinions. Soaking attacks can already be done, it's just inefficient because if you focus for that you have no way of drawing fire. Killing things is easy as well.


... and things to boost on the skillmonkey side:
1) The ability to kill things
2) The ability to deal with skill challenges.

Again, I feel these will be fine once casters are toned down a bit.

[Elricaltovilla]

Your suggestion actually sounds a lot like a Worldbuilding project I've been working on. Its supposed to be a PoW focused world, so full casters got the axe (or are relegated to being NPC villains) and everybody got varying amounts of maneuvers.

[PsyBomb]

The point about fix-it spells needing to be moved down in levels is a good one, and one I wouldn't mind. Also remember that the goal is NOT to make Casters useless, but rather to bring them out of T1-2 range. A lot of the "Assumed Utility" spells other than the aforementioned Fix-It stuff needs to be looked at, for sure.

I like the way some of the suggestions here are going. Shall we declare a PF starting point for this? They took the nerfbat to some of the worst offenders (though by no means all)

[Jack_Simth]

Except scrolls/wands/potions all still come online at the same time.
At present:if someone gets a few negative levels, the party Cleric can prepare a Restoration the next day, using some diamond dust that's a common component for a few different spells. You don't really need to invest much into it, you can do a day-after pill with only a little hassle, in the middle of the dungeon if needed. If you didn't pick up some diamond dust, you will need to retreat from the dungeon. The 100 gp in diamond dust is the cost of two potions of Cure Light Wounds, or four scrolls of same. You'll probably want to have a few doses worth on hand in case it happens more than once or on more than one person, but it's a relatively generic component suitable for multiple different spells, so you'll use it eventually. Pick up 1,000 gp in diamond dust at the point where the cleric gets 4th level spells, and you're set for a while (including an emergency Revivify if needed).

Post-change: You now need to very specifically prepare for such things. Unless you've got someone playing a Healer (by whatever name), you need a generic divine caster + a few scrolls of the specific fix-it spells. So you'll need a scroll of Cure Blindness/Deafness, a scroll of Remove Disease, a scroll of Remove Curse, a scroll of Restoration... and you're now needing to dedicate a rather lot more to the day-after pills. Four different scrolls of third level spells (Remove Disease, Remove Curse, Remove Blindness/Deafness, Neutralize Poison), and one fourth level scroll (Restoration) at a cost of 2,300 per iteration... and if more than one person might get it, you'll need multiple iterations. This is a noticable change, and significantly more expensive (and without the possibility of Revivify). If you don't get sick... well, that's just wasted resources, isn't it?

Yes, they're available post-change... but it's much more resource-intensive, and that's going to mean that the more equipment-dependant classes (meatshields & skillmonkies) have less available for the necessary equipment.

As far as CR needing to be rebalanced, that's already true. And the new casters would be warmage/beguiler/dread necromancer style: they know their entire list and cast spontaneously from it.
... which gets you back to the near-necessity of someone in the party taking a hit to be the dedicated healer who can't do much aside from fix-its, Warmage/Beguilder/Dread Necromancer style. That's not a fun position to play for most people, and fun's the point.
Or at least ensure that the Wizard, while able to do those things, isn't as good as the original at them (currently they are better). And the other side is limiting them to how much of it they can do.

So most of these would be restricted to a single class that does little else.

Again, rather than remove, restrict to a single class. This one would be more of a gish class, designed to fill the fighters role more than the wizard role. Something like an Alchemist base, since they would both focus on self-buffs.
I never said "remove" - I said "limit" - and for good reason. Most spells in the game are put there because it's a staple of one form or another of story.

Suppose we limit 'front line enabling spells' as such: Every time a critter under such effects affects a non-enchanted critter, the non-enchanted critter gets a Will save (at -1 DC for each prior save): If successfull, the enchanted critter's spell falls apart. So if the Wizard turns into a 11-headed Hydra and full attacks a troll Hunter (the MM one, CR 11 (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/troll.htm)) ... at the first hit, the troll gets a Will save (... oh, let's say it's a Wizard-11, 18 base Int, +2 racial, +2 level up, +6 Headband, 4th level spell = DC 23). The second hit, the troll's save is at DC 22, the third, DC 21, and so on. By the time that 11th head gets a hit in, the DC is down to 12, and there's pretty good odds that Will+8 troll hunter has long since broken the Polymorph (or Mirror Image, or Displacement, or Stoneskin, or...). The Wizard can still turn into a Roc and carry the party over the cliff... but he's not going to be stealing the Fighter's Schtick that way. The BBEG can turn into a snake and get a few solid hits in... but not for long. The Wizard can cast Displacement to avoid getting hit... but is taking some pretty severe risks if he does much more than retreat or buff allies.

Suppose we limit flight as such: It requires Concentration to maintain the spell (although the standard action spent that way can also count towards movement if the caster has it on himself, so you can still do a 'flying run' and such - and we remove such things as Sonorous Hum). Yes, you can cast Fly and get out of dodge... but you're going to need to invest a bit more to rain fire down on your enemies (ring of featherfall so you don't fall far, and... oh, you're still a sitting duck in the meanwhile, giving away your position with each spell and following a highly predictable path).

Suppose we limit long-term minionomancy effects as such: Every round of battle gives the critter a Will save to be freed vs. the DC of the spell (or what it would have had). So you can bind servants with relative impunity, but soldiers not so much. Those human skeletons you Animated will, sooner or later, 'go wild' if you use them a lot. For the wizard who wants to destroy a town with a horde of undead, this is only a minor problem (loses control of 5% of the horde per round of battle... but for purposes of killing the townsfolk, this isn't a big deal as skeletons are mindless hate anyway and will continue killing... then wander the countryside and continue to do so until destroyed). For the wizard who wants to conquer a town, well, he needs better control than that (probably involving sending such a force in smallish batches to wear down the town guard, then threating whoever's left once it looks like another such wave will kill them all). Stronger and more intelligent minions, while more useful, are also going to be harder to keep under control. So you can Planar Bind a Fire Elemental to fight for you for the next week... but sooner or later it WILL turn on it's "master".

... and so on.



Okay, on these you are correct, though BFC is generally the job of magic, not mundane

The problem becomes where you draw the line between "Battlefield control" and "Save-or-lose". It's the "Save-or-lose" that's the problem. A Solid Fog that keeps half of the battle at bay for a few rounds is fine (if you come within range, they're still at full capacity, or near enough, so the weakened caster still can't do much about them without help). A Stinking Cloud that turns half the battle into little more than targets for several rounds? Not so much (nearly anything can kill them very easily); such effects need to be limited in some manner.
Blasting, outside of mailman levels, does not compare to the damage of a mundane. These don't need to be touched.Ah, but the current damage amount is not why it's a problem: It's the range that's the problem. If I'm a human Wizard with Expedited Retreat up, I can strafe a troll with a ranged attack and take it down relatively easily all on my own. I just need to make sure to use a full-round action every now and again to stay out of Charge range with my now 60-foot move. If I can reliably deal damage from outside of the target's Charge range, and can reliably stay out of the target's Charge range, and the target doesn't have useful ranged attacks, then the target can't do diddly - in which case, why did I other to bring along the Fighter? Another Wizard to help me strafe would have been more useful. If, on the other hand, my blasty spells are all sufficiently short-ranged that I need someone keeping the troll from charging at me in the first place, then that's another story.

Aside from Fly, I agree. As stated before, the Flight is a staple. Taking that away actually hurts Fighters more than leaving it hurts Rogues, since the Fighters can't reach half of their enemies now.
As I've been saying: Limit, not remove. Significant difference. After we've put a caster's Concentration requirement onto all flight effects, we can come up with some "fly, mass" spell to get the entire party in the air with one Concentration check usage (oh yes, and you'd better make sure the Wizard doesn't take a hit while you're up there...).

This is the most relevant one, in my opinions. Soaking attacks can already be done, it's just inefficient because if you focus for that you have no way of drawing fire. Killing things is easy as well.
... if you're a sufficient enough threat that you need to be taken down first, then you're drawing fire vs. any reasonably intelligent opponent (this is why you go after the casters first in the current game). If we make the fighter's offence easier so that the Fighter is still a very meaningful threat even when sinking more resources into defence, then we've achieved that objective. If we make the fighter's defence easier so that the Fighter is still a hardened target even when sinking more resources into offence, then we've achieved that objective. If we directly add some mechanism to the fighter for drawing fire, then we've achieved that objective. The specific route is irrelevant, any of the three will do the job, but it's better to slowly turn them all up during testing until we achieve the specific balance we're after.
Again, I feel these will be fine once casters are toned down a bit.Maybe. A lot of playtesting would be necessary, I imagine.