Dungeons & Dragons 3.6

[Matthew]

So, I have been thinking about it for a while now and I thought I might as well put my thoughts into writing. Dungeons & Dragons 3.5 is not satisfactorily balanced (hell, we all know that, right?!) and it's fun to try a balance it. So, I thought I would make an effort to codify the changes I think would most 'improve' the game, but I want to hear other people's opinions as to what is and is not workable.

One of the biggest changes is how Spell Slots work. I am opting for a Spell Point System, but not a full blown one. Spells cost 1 Magic Point per Spell Level to cast spontaneously (i.e. for Sorcerers and the like) and the same to Memorize (i.e. for Clerics and Wizards and such).

The number of Magic Points available to the Spell Casting Classes are:

Wizard: [(3 x Wizard Level) + Intelligence Bonus]
Sorcerer: [(3 x Sorcerer Level) + Charisma Bonus]
Cleric: [(2 x Cleric Level) + Wisdom Bonus]

Paladins, Bards and Rangers would get: [(1 x Class Level) + Casting Attribute Bonus]

I think this provides a more uniform and toned down magic power progression.

I have plenty of other ideas (like most people), but I thought I would deploy this one first.

[Zagreen]

Call me crazy but I've always liked preparing spell slots per level. But reworking the magic system is probably a good start on balancing everything out so doing away with it maybe isn't such a bad idea.

I'm not sure if lowering spells per day (at high levels anyhow, this system probably means more spells per day at low levels, which is fine) is the best way to balance spellcasters, though. Yeah it means there's an easy way to keep them in line (throw in a few extra encounters after they're out of spell points, presto) but that's boring and not very fun. I like the simplicity of this system but I think the cost between 1st level spells and 9th level spells is much too low. I like having more not quite so powerful abilities I can use a lot than having a few powerful abilities I can go nova with 1/day.

Even though sorcerers have the same number of spellpoints as wizards this does do a good job of making spontaneous casting more attractive, though. A sorcerer can pull out 8th and 9th level spells whenever he needs it, but every 8th or 9th level spell a wizard prepares takes up a HUGE chunk of his spells for the day.

Also nice to see clerics getting put in their place. I sure hope those poor adventurers have more healing options though...

It looks like bards get totally hosed for no apparent reason. Do you plan on giving them craploads of other bonuses or do you just hate bards?

[Legoman]

Instead, go for a sort of spell and recovery mechanism, much like Tome of Battle.

Look at a lot of MMO's - a player can keep going all day, but there's only so many enemies that they can bite off at once before dying. So it should be with casters - not that before you run out of spells you own, and afterwards you have nothing to offer - where that switchover occurs is irrelevant, it's still a problem.

Giving them a consistent power-level all day long should be the first option.

EDIT: Wait, what about this!

Use the spell points system from UA, but only give them something like 30 spell points in their pool at 20-th level. (Enough for a high level spell or two)

Recovering some of your spell points is a full-round action.

This means, you can always 'go nova' and dump your full allotment of power, but it's not very much, and you're going to waste the game's most precious quantities (time) getting it back.

Double Edit:

Recharge Magic (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/unearthedRecharge.html) works too, but since I didn't think of it, it's not as cool...

[IonizedChicken]

I definitely like the idea of magic points and I support having a way to recover them. Rather then the recovery method being constantly active though, I would like it to be more like a state of meditation that requires Concentration. Something along the lines of recovering 1 magic point per 5 points you already have every 5 minutes. If you exhaust your magic point pool too much you could be fatigued (but this could be gotten rid of by meditating).

I also don't think spells should advance simply by 1 point per level, as basically it's assuming a 9th level spell is as good as a 7th level spell and a 2nd level spell, which is not true at all. Rather, it could be along the lines of (2 + L^2)/2 and triple the normal amount of magic points.

This would mean a high level caster could essentially cast hundreds of low level spells per day, but I see no problem with that. In fact, it might actually be a good idea, since supposedly high level casters have studied and trained so long that such spells are but petty tricks to them.

And what about multi-class casters? It always annoyed that it was very difficult to multi-class with casters. Perhaps casters should take the ToB route -- your caster level in a class equals your class level + 1/2 other class levels and you can select spells based on your caster level rather than your class level.

[Zeta Kai]

Um, did we forget about the divine hippie? Where's the druid fit in to all of this?

I would imagine that the druid functions like this:
• Druid: [(2 x Druid Level) + Wisdom Bonus].

Also, I agree with Zagreen. Bards need some love. How about this:
• Bard: [(2 x Bard Level) + Charisma Bonus].

There, now everyone's happy! Let's go get ice cream!

[Kultrum]

Also sorc should be more like [(4 x Sorc lvl) +cha mod] because... well they can cast more per day...

Yay! Ice Cream!

[Matthew]

Thanks for the feedback folks.


I like the simplicity of this system but I think the cost between 1st level spells and 9th level spells is much too low. I like having more not quite so powerful abilities I can use a lot than having a few powerful abilities I can go nova with 1/day.
I dunno, we're still talking only 6-8 9th Level Spells for a 20th Level Wizard and then he's done. He still can prepare a bunch of low level magics as he pleases. I guess, if what you're saying is that Wizards are mainly going to prepare High Level Spells and ignore Low Level ones, well that's kind of up to them, isn't it? This way they have the option, but have their maximum power reduced.

Even though sorcerers have the same number of spellpoints as wizards this does do a good job of making spontaneous casting more attractive, though. A sorcerer can pull out 8th and 9th level spells whenever he needs it, but every 8th or 9th level spell a wizard prepares takes up a HUGE chunk of his spells for the day.
Very true, which is indeed the intent.

Also nice to see clerics getting put in their place. I sure hope those poor adventurers have more healing options though...
Well, it's always a trade off with Clerics. I have other plans for them... Muwhahhahah!

It looks like bards get totally hosed for no apparent reason. Do you plan on giving them craploads of other bonuses or do you just hate bards?
Nah, I love those guys. Still, they are getting a third of the power available to Wizards and Sorcerers. I do plan on giving them some other nice bonuses, though.

Instead, go for a sort of spell and recovery mechanism, much like Tome of Battle.

Look at a lot of MMO's - a player can keep going all day, but there's only so many enemies that they can bite off at once before dying. So it should be with casters - not that before you run out of spells you own, and afterwards you have nothing to offer - where that switchover occurs is irrelevant, it's still a problem.

Giving them a consistent power-level all day long should be the first option.
I'm not really on board with this view of Spell Casting, constant recharge makes no sense to me. Resting to regain magical power is still my preferred mechanism. I want to tone down Spell Casters significantly at high levels.

I definitely like the idea of magic points and I support having a way to recover them. Rather then the recovery method being constantly active though, I would like it to be more like a state of meditation that requires Concentration. Something along the lines of recovering 1 magic point per 5 points you already have every 5 minutes. If you exhaust your magic point pool too much you could be fatigued (but this could be gotten rid of by meditating).
Yeah, I suppose I should take the time to discuss Spell / Magic Point recovery. I intend them to be recovered at the same rate as Hit Points and by the same means (i.e. rest). Meditation should be part of the process, of course (paralleling the Healing Skill). Exactly how Hit Points will be recovered is another matter, but it's an open discussion. If I were to allow MP to be recovered as Legoman suggests, I would expect HP to be recovered at the same rate, ala PS2 Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance.

I also don't think spells should advance simply by 1 point per level, as basically it's assuming a 9th level spell is as good as a 7th level spell and a 2nd level spell, which is not true at all. Rather, it could be along the lines of (2 + L^2)/2 and triple the normal amount of magic points.
Depends on the Spell, I suspect. All the same, point taken. Have to think about it.

This would mean a high level caster could essentially cast hundreds of low level spells per day, but I see no problem with that. In fact, it might actually be a good idea, since supposedly high level casters have studied and trained so long that such spells are but petty tricks to them.
Nah, High Level Casters aren't going to have 100 MP. (20 x 3) +20 maximum, I think.

And what about multi-class casters? It always annoyed that it was very difficult to multi-class with casters. Perhaps casters should take the ToB route -- your caster level in a class equals your class level + 1/2 other class levels and you can select spells based on your caster level rather than your class level.
It's not really difficult, just difficult without losing power. I don't mind that aspect, but I can understand your position.


Um, did we forget about the divine hippie? Where's the druid fit in to all of this?

I would imagine that the druid functions like this:
• Druid: [(2 x Druid Level) + Wisdom Bonus].

Also, I agree with Zagreen. Bards need some love. How about this:
• Bard: [(2 x Bard Level) + Charisma Bonus].
Heh. Yeah, Druids. I wouldn't be sad to see them disappear... Bards will get more love, but not more MP, I think.

Also sorc should be more like [(4 x Sorc lvl) +cha mod] because... well they can cast more per day...
I don't think so. It is possible that would work better, but for the reasons discussed above, I'm not convinced its necessary.

Okay, so feel free to continue discussing Magic Points, but I thought I would throw out another idea for parallel discussion today:

Saving Throws

All Saving Throws advance at a 1:1 rate by Character Level. [i.e. All Saving Throw Bonuses = Character Level].

[Zagreen]

I dunno, we're still talking only 6-8 9th Level Spells for a 20th Level Wizard and then he's done. He still can prepare a bunch of low level magics as he pleases. I guess, if what you're saying is that Wizards are mainly going to prepare High Level Spells and ignore Low Level ones, well that's kind of up to them, isn't it? This way they have the option, but have their maximum power reduced.

Well, basically what I'm saying (probably not very well) is pretty much the same as IonizedChicken... I don't think there's really much of an option other than preparing mostly high level spells and hoping you win enough battles with them, because high level spells are more cost efficient than low level ones. I mean, preparing 2 Polymorph spells costs almost as much as 1 Shapechange spell. I guess you'd probably want to change polymorph spells anyhow but it's the same for other spells: 2 phantasmal killers for 1 wierd, etc. You can prepare 6-10 level 7-9 spells and have enough spells to beat a few encounters, or you can prepare 15-20 level 4-6 spells and probably not have enough spells to beat a few encounters at all.


Nah, I love those guys. Still, they are getting a third of the power available to Wizards and Sorcerers. I do plan on giving them some other nice bonuses, though.

They better be some HUGE bonuses, because you totally beat the crap out of them with the nerf stick! I can understand cutting clerics' spells per day because they're one of the most powerful classes but BARDS? Before they had more than 3/4 the spells per day of a wizard (well, non-specialist) and now they're down to less than 1/2 as many as wizards. That's harsh.



Saving Throws

All Saving Throws advance at a 1:1 rate by Character Level. [i.e. All Saving Throw Bonuses = Character Level].

Ok, I like the simplicity of this but this pretty much means you're going to have to completely recalculate every save DC ever right? I mean going up against current save DCs this means high level characters are basically going to have a 95% chance to resist anything that allows a saving throw. 1/2 character level would be simpler if you don't want to go through and adapt every single thing in the game since it would be more in line with the current bonuses.

At low levels stats and race mods are usually more important to saving throws than saving throw advancement by class is anyhow so it's not a big deal to see saving throws removed from classes, in fact it makes it a bit more flexible. At high levels the differences might get smaller though which could make things a little more bland.

[IonizedChicken]

I'm generally against this sort of change to the saving throws. I mean, I like the concept of different classes being good at resisting different things. There are definitely some problems with the current system, though, which I wouldn't mind having remedied. I think that simply adding a new kind of saving throw progression -- 'medium' saving throws progression, which appears in other d20 games (like SW) -- would fix the issue. Medium saves go: 1 1 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 9 . Poor saves would be rarely used.

Besides, if you're planning to equalize the saving throw progression, why should there be three types of them? Just one is enough, considering they are all the same.

Another thought: considering one of the things spellcasters have going is their flexibility and the number of abilities they have, perhaps other classes should have similar abilities as well? Again, taking a note from Tome of Battle, every class could have multitudes of abilities to choose from that may be on par with spells.

For example, while spellcasters would get Suggestion the spell, Bards and Rogues might be able to pick the Suggestion ability, which is akin to the Epic use of the Bluff skill (lower DC though, of course). This is, of course, a mere example. It would be rather bland to have abilities exactly mimic spells.

Another interesting thought is to be able to create magic items with various Craft skills.

All of these things may be too much, but I'm just throwing ideas around.

[Amphimir Míriel]

Im not sure about the spell point system... While I see that it would be a superior alternative to the vancian "cast and forget" system, it would be a tad too different from classic D&D

My 2 mexican cents to a proposed 3.6 system would be to officialize the following obviously needed fixes:

1 - Nerf several spells (plenty of threads on that)
2 - Fix some fighter feats (TWF and Sword and Board should be on par with THF)
3 - Some core classes, like the Bard and the Ranger, need more/better abilities (also plenty of threads on that)

[Matthew]

Well, basically what I'm saying (probably not very well) is pretty much the same as IonizedChicken... I don't think there's really much of an option other than preparing mostly high level spells and hoping you win enough battles with them, because high level spells are more cost efficient than low level ones. I mean, preparing 2 Polymorph spells costs almost as much as 1 Shapechange spell. I guess you'd probably want to change polymorph spells anyhow but it's the same for other spells: 2 phantasmal killers for 1 wierd, etc. You can prepare 6-10 level 7-9 spells and have enough spells to beat a few encounters, or you can prepare 15-20 level 4-6 spells and probably not have enough spells to beat a few encounters at all.
Fair enough observation. I don't play enough High Level D&D 3.x (11-20) to know exactly how this might work out. Still, the point is to depower Spell Casters, so I think that this falls under the 'Tactical Options' heading. All the same, I will be hitting some Spells with the Nerf Bat regardless, so it might not matter eventually. It's a good point and one which I will have to consider.


They better be some HUGE bonuses, because you totally beat the crap out of them with the nerf stick! I can understand cutting clerics' spells per day because they're one of the most powerful classes but BARDS? Before they had more than 3/4 the spells per day of a wizard (well, non-specialist) and now they're down to less than 1/2 as many as wizards. That's harsh.
Okay, let's take a look at this:

Dungeons & Dragons 3.5

Bard: (1+2+3+4+5+6) x4 = (21 x 4) = 84 Spell Levels
Cleric: [(1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9) x 5] + 1+2+3+4+5 = (45 x 5) + 15 = 240 Spell Levels
Druid: [(1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9) x 4] + 1+2+3+4+5 = (45 x 4) + 15 = 195 Spell Levels
Paladin: (1+2+3+4) x3 = 10 x 3 = 30 Spell Levels
Ranger: (1+2+3+4) x3 = 10 x 3 = 30 Spell Levels
Sorcerer: (1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9) x4 = (45 x 6) = 270 Spell Levels
Wizard: (1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9) x4 = (45 x 4) = 180 Spell Levels

Dungeons & Dragons 3.6

Bard: 20 Magic Points (About 1/4)
Cleric: 40 Magic Points (1/6)
Druid: 40 Magic Points (About 1/5)
Paladin: 20 Magic Points (About 2/3)
Ranger: 20 Magic Points (About 2/3)
Sorcerer: 60 Magic Points (About 2/9
Wizard: 60 Magic Points (1/3)

The reduction doesn't seem too severe to me, but even so, rest assured that Bards will be overall benefiting. I will certainly keep this concern in mind.


Ok, I like the simplicity of this but this pretty much means you're going to have to completely recalculate every save DC ever right? I mean going up against current save DCs this means high level characters are basically going to have a 95% chance to resist anything that allows a saving throw. 1/2 character level would be simpler if you don't want to go through and adapt every single thing in the game since it would be more in line with the current bonuses.

Well, that really is the point. Increasing Saving Throws is intended to make Characters less vulnerable to Magic (especially the poor old Fighter). Of course, there are going to be some cases where changes will have to be made. I have some thoughts about changing how Spell Casters operate, as well, which may change things, tying DC to Magic Points and Caster Level.


At low levels stats and race mods are usually more important to saving throws than saving throw advancement by class is anyhow so it's not a big deal to see saving throws removed from classes, in fact it makes it a bit more flexible. At high levels the differences might get smaller though which could make things a little more bland.

Yeah, Attribute Bonuses make the difference. I think Feats should grant +4 Bonuses, as well. It might possibly get bland, but that's the risk I'm running by trying to make the game more systematic and consistant (i.e. balanced).

I'm generally against this sort of change to the saving throws. I mean, I like the concept of different classes being good at resisting different things. There are definitely some problems with the current system, though, which I wouldn't mind having remedied. I think that simply adding a new kind of saving throw progression -- 'medium' saving throws progression, which appears in other d20 games (like SW) -- would fix the issue. Medium saves go: 1 1 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 9 . Poor saves would be rarely used.
Different Classes are already good at resisting different things, but mainly by virtue of their primary Attribute Score. A Level 1 Rogue is likely going to have a better Reflex Save than Will or Fortitude just by virtue of his Dexterity.


Besides, if you're planning to equalize the saving throw progression, why should there be three types of them? Just one is enough, considering they are all the same.

Indeed, there do not need to be Instead you would have a 'Base Saving Throw', modified by Attributes for type. Saying that, another possibility is to treat Saving Throws in a similar manner to Skills, which would allow for a diversity in Saving Throws.


Another thought: considering one of the things spellcasters have going is their flexibility and the number of abilities they have, perhaps other classes should have similar abilities as well? Again, taking a note from Tome of Battle, every class could have multitudes of abilities to choose from that may be on par with spells.
For example, while spellcasters would get Suggestion the spell, Bards and Rogues might be able to pick the Suggestion ability, which is akin to the Epic use of the Bluff skill (lower DC though, of course). This is, of course, a mere example. It would be rather bland to have abilities exactly mimic spells.
Another interesting thought is to be able to create magic items with various Craft skills.
All of these things may be too much, but I'm just throwing ideas around.
This is a perrenial problem in D&D. The Tome of Battle Solution is one possibility, but I think for the moment I want to keep this idea in reserve. Definitely something to think about, though.

Im not sure about the spell point system... While I see that it would be a superior alternative to the vancian "cast and forget" system, it would be a tad too different from classic D&D
It's not too different, I think. Possibly it is truer to Vancian Casting than other versions of D&D (Wizards still have to prepare their Spells, they just aren't coralled by level). I usually don't use the Vancian System at all in my Home Brewed and House Ruled (A)D&D Campaign, so I may well be biast here.


My 2 mexican cents to a proposed 3.6 system would be to officialize the following obviously needed fixes:

1 - Nerf several spells (plenty of threads on that)
2 - Fix some fighter feats (TWF and Sword and Board should be on par with THF)
3 - Some core classes, like the Bard and the Ranger, need more/better abilities (also plenty of threads on that)
Indeed.

Base Attack Bonus

Here is another rules alteration I am going to throw out there. What if all Base Classes used the Full Base Attack progression, but we removed the Weapon Finesse Feat from the game. My thinking is that most Base Attack Bonuses are not very far apart from one another anyway, but if we remove Weapon Finesse it means that Strength Based Warrior types remain head and shoulders above Dexterity Based Rogue types.

[Tyrael]

Base Attack Bonus

Here is another rules alteration I am going to throw out there. What if all Base Classes used the Full Base Attack progression, but we removed the Weapon Finesse Feat from the game. My thinking is that most Base Attack Bonuses are not very far apart from one another anyway, but if we remove Weapon Finesse it means that Strength Based Warrior types remain head and shoulders above Dexterity Based Rogue types.

Why, exactly, is this a good thing? The only thing that keeps Dex-based Rogue types viable in combat is their high to-hit from Weapon Finesse and ranged weapons. Nix that, and not only are the tanks out-damaging the sneaks, but out-hitting them, too. Without Weapon Finesse, Str-based meatshields will become the only viable combat type, period. Which, IMHO, is boring, not to mention subtracting a lot of flavor from the game, as well as nullifying a lot of classes (Rogue, Duelist, Swashbuckler, etc).

[paigeoliver]

You thought fighting characters took levels in a lot of classes before? Then make every class full BAB and witness the full glory of characters with levels in 20 different classes.

[IonizedChicken]

Indeed, there do not need to be Instead you would have a 'Base Saving Throw', modified by Attributes for type. Saying that, another possibility is to treat Saving Throws in a similar manner to Skills, which would allow for a diversity in Saving Throws.

The saving throw skill idea is really awesome, I have to admit.



Here is another rules alteration I am going to throw out there. What if all Base Classes used the Full Base Attack progression, but we removed the Weapon Finesse Feat from the game. My thinking is that most Base Attack Bonuses are not very far apart from one another anyway, but if we remove Weapon Finesse it means that Strength Based Warrior types remain head and shoulders above Dexterity Based Rogue types.

I don't know about this part. I mean, stat modifiers can reach +10 at higher levels while the difference between high and medium base attack bonus can only ever reach 5. And this won't only hurt dexterous rogues; the dexterity-based warrior is a fairly popular type of character that will be nigh impossible to play without the Weapon Finesse feat.

[Matthew]

Why, exactly, is this a good thing? The only thing that keeps Dex-based Rogue types viable in combat is their high to-hit from Weapon Finesse and ranged weapons. Nix that, and not only are the tanks out-damaging the sneaks, but out-hitting them, too. Without Weapon Finesse, Str-based meatshields will become the only viable combat type, period. Which, IMHO, is boring, not to mention subtracting a lot of flavor from the game, as well as nullifying a lot of classes (Rogue, Duelist, Swashbuckler, etc).
Well, it's really up to you. Rogue's aren't really suffering much from this at low levels, since they cannot take Weapon Finesse until Level 3 and at high levels it just means they have to think about Strength as well as Dexterity. Obviously there is some degree of trade off here, but the idea is to increase the amount of MAD for Melee Dexterity Builds. It was no big deal in previous editions and I don't really see much of a problem. If we track the Rogue's BAB, you might see why:

1: +0 becomes +1
2: +1 becomes +2
3: +2 becomes +3 - at this point Weapon Finesse would usually come into play.
6: +4 becomes +6 / +1
11: +8 / +3 becomes +11 / +6 / +1
16: +12 / +7 / +2 becomes +16 / +11 / +6 / +1
20: +15 / +10 / +5 becomes +20 / +15 / +10 / +5

Even if the Rogue has half the Strength Bonus [20 (+5)] he probably has in Dexterity [30 (+10)] he'll still be better off.
For Fighters, Barbarians, Rangers and Paladins it's possibly a bigger deal, but those guys should be investing heavily in Strength anyway.

You thought fighting characters took levels in a lot of classes before? Then make every class full BAB and witness the full glory of characters with levels in 20 different classes.
Well, if they don't mind the experience penalties. Still, it doesn't really bother me much. The way D&D went with Multi Classing, it's no big deal.

The saving throw skill idea is really awesome, I have to admit.
Cool beans. Yeah, I like it quite a lot (I use it in my Home Brewed and House Ruled Game). Incidently, I have a similar idea for Weapon Skills and Magic Skills, but we'll see how that pans out.

I don't know about this part. I mean, stat modifiers can reach +10 at higher levels while the difference between high and medium base attack bonus can only ever reach 5. And this won't only hurt dexterous rogues; the dexterity-based warrior is a fairly popular type of character that will be nigh impossible to play without the Weapon Finesse feat.
Sure, and that's a reasonable concern, but as I said above, the difference is not necessarily that great and the general idea is to prevent Dexterity from 'stealing the show'.

Strength, Dexterity and Bows

It never made much sense to me that Strength doesn't work with Thrown or Drawn Ranged Weapons, but Dexterity does. So, today's proposal is to allow a Character to use his Strength or Dexterity Bonus when attacking with a Thrown or Drawn weapon. This obviously reduces the MAD of the Strength based Fighter, but I don't think this is a bad thing really. Strength doesn't govern ver much compared to Dexterity, so it seems like a fair trade off to me.

Base Attack Bonus as Skills

Okay, following on from the Saving Throws as Skills idea, I thought I would throw out there this idea. Fighters have low Skill Points because they invested them in Weapons training, right? So let's see them:

Every Class gets a certain number of Skill Points to be used on Weapons they are proficient with, these basic Skills / Proficiencies are:

Unarmed (Grappling, Unarmed Strike)
Dagger (Daggers, Knives)
Sword (Swords, Scimitars, Falcatta)
Shield (Shields)
Spear (Staff, Spear)
Mace (Clubs, Maces, Hammers and Flails)
Axe (Axes and Picks)
Throw (Thrown Weapons, Slings)
Bow (Bows and Cross Bows)

The number of Skill Ranks that can be invested are capped by level. Exotic Weapons require their own Skill investment.

I should point out my simplified Weapons tables when discussing this: Simple Weapons (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31637) and Martial Weapons (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31788). Weapons that are a combination of types, such as the Halberd (Axe + Spear) use the lower Skill Rank.

[Jack Mann]

I'm not really on board your magic points system. Basically, you're moving wizards from winning all of the time to winning one or two encounters a day, and then, "I'll just sit this one out, guys. Rah, rah, team, and all that." Or else they can be fairly ineffectual the rest of the day.

This isn't any fun. I agree that they need a hit in power, but I think your solution makes them useless a large part of the time.

Really, wizards, clerics, and sorcerers aren't overpowered. No, really, they aren't. Their spells are overpowered.

Look at Arcana Evolved. The magister class is far more powerful, in terms of his spellcasting, than any of the core classes. He can change his spells known every day from a spell list that has most of the spells in the game (and can get what he wants of the rest with feats), cast spontaneously from that list, and can weave them or make them laden for even more flexibility. Add to that the class features he gets, and you've got a pretty powerful caster. In D&D, he would make wizards tremble.

But in Arcana Evolved, he's fine. Why? The spells.

In Arcana Evolved, they changed the spells. They were deliberately weakened, and pushed to higher levels. Spells of similar power were added, to help flesh out the list. The magister doesn't outshine his party, but he is useful, and can be useful throughout the day.

[Morty]

I'm not really on board your magic points system. Basically, you're moving wizards from winning all of the time to winning one or two encounters a day, and then, "I'll just sit this one out, guys. Rah, rah, team, and all that." Or else they can be fairly ineffectual the rest of the day.

This isn't any fun. I agree that they need a hit in power, but I think your solution makes them useless a large part of the time.

Really, wizards, clerics, and sorcerers aren't overpowered. No, really, they aren't. Their spells are overpowered.

Look at Arcana Evolved. The magister class is far more powerful, in terms of his spellcasting, than any of the core classes. He can change his spells known every day from a spell list that has most of the spells in the game (and can get what he wants of the rest with feats), cast spontaneously from that list, and can weave them or make them laden for even more flexibility. Add to that the class features he gets, and you've got a pretty powerful caster. In D&D, he would make wizards tremble.

But in Arcana Evolved, he's fine. Why? The spells.

In Arcana Evolved, they changed the spells. They were deliberately weakened, and pushed to higher levels. Spells of similar power were added, to help flesh out the list. The magister doesn't outshine his party, but he is useful, and can be useful throughout the day.

QFA. I don't have Arcana Evolved, but I don't really think that magic point system is any more balanced than preparation, and it's true that spells are overpoweded, not casters.

[Matthew]

I'm not really on board your magic points system. Basically, you're moving wizards from winning all of the time to winning one or two encounters a day, and then, "I'll just sit this one out, guys. Rah, rah, team, and all that." Or else they can be fairly ineffectual the rest of the day.
This isn't any fun. I agree that they need a hit in power, but I think your solution makes them useless a large part of the time.

Well, let's test that theory by taking a look at 3.5 Total Spell Levels versus 3.6 Magic Points:

1: 1 SL becomes 3 MP
2: 3 SL becomes 6 MP
3: 4 SL becomes 9 MP
4: 7 SL becomes 12 MP
5: 10 SL becomes 15 MP
6: 15 SL becomes 18 MP
7: 20 SL becomes 21 MP
8: 27 SL becomes 24 MP
9: 34 SL becomes 27 MP
10: 43 SL becomes 30 MP
11: 52 SL becomes 33 MP
12: 63 SL becomes 36 MP
13: 74 SL becomes 39 MP
14: 87 SL becomes 42 MP
15: 100 SL becomes 45 MP
16: 115 SL becomes 48 MP
17: 130 SL becomes 51 MP
18: 147 SL becomes 54 MP
19: 163 SL becomes 57 MP
20: 180 SL becomes 60 MP

Looks to me as though Wizards have access to more Spell Levels until Level 8, at which point in 3.5 their Spell Levels accelerate dramatically (also the point at which Wizards are generally considered to have outpaced the Non Spell Casting Classes in power). Sure, their power is reduced dramatically later on, but that's the intention. Past Level Eight Wizards and other Spell Casters have enough access to magic gadetry that I seriously doubt they will ever be sat around twiddling their thumbs.


Really, wizards, clerics, and sorcerers aren't overpowered. No, really, they aren't. Their spells are overpowered.

Look at Arcana Evolved. The magister class is far more powerful, in terms of his spellcasting, than any of the core classes. He can change his spells known every day from a spell list that has most of the spells in the game (and can get what he wants of the rest with feats), cast spontaneously from that list, and can weave them or make them laden for even more flexibility. Add to that the class features he gets, and you've got a pretty powerful caster. In D&D, he would make wizards tremble.

But in Arcana Evolved, he's fine. Why? The spells.

In Arcana Evolved, they changed the spells. They were deliberately weakened, and pushed to higher levels. Spells of similar power were added, to help flesh out the list. The magister doesn't outshine his party, but he is useful, and can be useful throughout the day.
Well, whilst what you say is true up to a point, there is a balance to be struck between Spell Power and Frequency. Arcana Evolved is one approach, increasing Frequency and reducing Power but I don't think it's the only one. I am proposing reducing Frequency at higher levels at this point, but obviously Spell Power will also have to be reduced in some cases and that is going to be another area of discussion at some point.

[Matthew]

Okay, time to throw out another idea:

Skills are treated like Weapon Proficiencies instead of as Class and Non Class Skills. If it's a Class Skill, your Character is proficient, if not he has a -4 Penalty, but Ranks can be purchased on a 1:1 Basis for any Skill and the Cap is the Level of the Character.

Roll Base Attack Bonuses, Saves and Skills into the same progression system [i.e. 1-20], result:

Weapon Skills (9)

Unarmed
Throw
Spear
Shield
Sword (Sword, Scimitar, Falcatta, etc..)
Dagger (Dagger, Knife, etc...)
Axe (Axes, Picks, etc...)
Mace (Maces, Flails, Hammers, etc...)
Bow (Bows, Cross Bows)

Saves (3)

Fortitude
Reflex
Will

Skills

The usual suspects

Magic Skills (9)

Spell Craft (General)
Spell Craft (Necromancy)
Etc...


So, for example, Fighters and Wizards would get twelve more starting Skill Points under this system, which they could invest in Skills or in Weapons or Magic...

[EvilElitest]

Wizards aren't so much over powered, as there spells. Druids and clerics might need some fixing, but not nerfing. The real thing is their spells

The biggest challenge is making fighters up to par with the martail adepts, and rangers and bards equal to rouges
from,
EE

[Matthew]

Yes, we have already agreed that certain Spells need to be altered. I happen to also think that frequency is a problem. I think over on gaming I posted an eight point 'things that need to be done'. I'll repost it below:


1) Many Spells Descriptions and effects need to be adjusted
2) Time taken to learn Spells in the first place needs to be increased
3) Available number of Spell Slots needs to be revised (in most cases)
4) Spell DCs and Saving Throws need to be correlated
5) An end to Wizards' automatically learning 'two spells per level'
6) Spell Slot recovery rate (Spell Caster Primary Resource) needs to be brought into line with Hit Point recovery rate (Non Spell Caster Primary Resource) or vice versa
7) Spells acquired on a similar mechanism to Skill Points and Feats (i.e. Character Points)



All the above applies to Clerics as to Wizards, the only additional change would be in forcing Clerics to learn Spells as Wizards do.

Also, though this falls under the purview of 1), it deserves its own number:

8) Spell Casting Times need to be addressed and in many cases increased.

Spell Slot Recovery and Hit Point Recovery need to be brought into line. Whether that means 1 Hit Point and 1 Spell Slot per day or 100 Hit Points and 100 Spell Slots per day doesn't really matter, so long as both resources recover at similar rates.