PDA

View Full Version : The spellcaster (replacement class)



InaVegt
2007-08-04, 10:13 AM
As people here know, the spellcasters are very powerful, this is supposed to level the field somewhat.

The table is the same as the table of the generic spellcaster from UA, bonus feats are chosen from the wizard's feat list. Spell can be picked from the combined list of the cleric, wizard and druid. Now for the radical stuff:

I propose a 3 stat system for spellcasing:

Int: You need at least an int of 10 + spell level to know a spell, magic items can't help here (beyond the tomes), it's about inherent intelligence.

Wis: You need at least a wis of 8 + spell level to cast a spell, it also gives your bonus spells/day.

Cha: Charisma is used for determining save DCs, the total amount of charisma you have is also used to determine the maximum bonus you can have on caster level checks and as your caster level for variable effects.

The reasoning behind this (in fluff terms): Intelligence gives you understanding of the concepts behind a spell, Wisdom grants you the ability to apply the knowledge of a spell to the current situation in which you wish to use the spell, charisma is the force which fuels the spell, giving it it's power.

[hr]

What do you think?

Fuum Bango
2007-08-04, 10:18 AM
Hmm, nothing wrong with it, I'll try it out and see if anyone like it. :smallsmile:

Keledrath
2007-08-04, 01:00 PM
This would seriously pump up stat demand, and it blurs the difference between wizard, sorceror, and cleric. I don't like the concept.

Cyrano
2007-08-04, 01:10 PM
So if you happen to get a mediocre dice roll you are officially more useless than a commoner?

InaVegt
2007-08-04, 01:37 PM
@Bookboy: As I see it, there *should* be no difference in between spellcasters besides their selection of spells.

@D'anna: That's why it's recommended to choose classes after die rolls, ya see.

Keledrath
2007-08-04, 01:39 PM
Well, it really cuts down on verstality in classes. And you never mentioned a counter for my first complaint. I mean, in order to cast 9th level spells, you need a base inteligence of 19, and a Wisdom of 19, and then CHA would make it hard to resist, just to many needed abilities.

InaVegt
2007-08-04, 01:42 PM
Well, it really cuts down on verstality in classes. And you never mentioned a counter for my first complaint. I mean, in order to cast 9th level spells, you need a base inteligence of 19, and a Wisdom of 19, and then CHA would make it hard to resist, just to many needed abilities.

As I said, this is meant to balance classes, as high level casters are insanely powerful under the current rules.

Though you'd only need a 17 for wisdom, not 19.

Keledrath
2007-08-04, 01:45 PM
Yeah, but with these they become severly underpowered. The town has already found a way of bringng CoDzilla to its knees, and they overuse it. Two words= Antimagic Field.

Nocte
2007-08-04, 02:40 PM
I think this is a great idea. But as mentioned before, this would the spellcaster too much. Maybe you could find a way to balance this making the 3 stats necessary but only needing one to increase over time...

Note to D'anna Biers: Your avatar scares me a lot :smallfrown:

Durin_Deathless
2007-08-04, 02:51 PM
you could do something with Con. Lots of books say that spells take energy. maybe have a Con check(lower one) or take nonlethal damage based on spell level. say DC 5 or 10+spell level

InaVegt
2007-08-04, 03:35 PM
Yeah, but with these they become severly underpowered. The town has already found a way of bringng CoDzilla to its knees, and they overuse it. Two words= Antimagic Field.

Yeah, and can the fighter combating a wizard use an anti magic field?

Nocte
2007-08-04, 03:40 PM
you could do something with Con. Lots of books say that spells take energy. maybe have a Con check(lower one) or take nonlethal damage based on spell level. say DC 5 or 10+spell level

There are something like that on true20. You make a save of become fatigued when you cast spells.

Now, with that option you would need 4 good abilities to make a decent spellcaster.

This is something I made for my setting (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=51519).


Forced spell(ex):

An adept can cast more spells per day than her limit but she takes damage value equal to the spell level.

If the adept pass the fortitude save to resist injury, she can cast the spell, else she can't. Anyways she takes normally the accumulative -1x(number of times this ability has been used that day) to fortitude saves to resist injury.

Note: I use the injury system variant.

Dronin
2007-08-04, 04:51 PM
I like the idea but... :smallconfused:
like the rest of the comments here I think the caster would be under powered.
Would be a great concept yet the actual end result would be very difficult to actually pull off. :smallfrown:

Reinboom
2007-08-04, 06:36 PM
So the higher overall stats your group shares, the more drastically powerful casters are. I do not like the idea of relying on MAD to balance a class since any two groups almost surely never uses the same stat distribution.

robotrobot2
2007-08-12, 01:35 PM
A nice idea would be to let the player choose one ability for knowledge of spells and bonus spells, and another ability for save DC's. Allow a spellcaster to sacrifice the first lvl and fifth lvl bonus feats to gain either a familiar or the turn undead ability. That would result in a relatively well-balanced class.

Shades of Gray
2007-08-12, 01:40 PM
Note to D'anna Biers: Your avatar scares me a lot:smallfrown:

You are scared by that kitty too? Guess we are in the same boat, it is FRIGHTENING.

And about the whole Wis AND Int thing, does this apply to divine casters as well? Cause is should be reversed for divine the way I see it. And Cha? Thank God! Sorcerers not casting spells cause they just ain't pretty enough? Finally a better solution

SithLackey
2007-08-12, 01:53 PM
I think this is a great idea, even though more distinction between types of casters may be needed (not neccissarily arcane vs. divine, but something).

As for the MAD problem, this could be what really makes spellcasters HARD to be. It isn't too hard to be a decent caster under this system, say a 13 or 14 in WIS and INT, so casters remain at (or maybe a little below) par for the lower levels. Then, when they would normally begin to be immensely powerful, they succumb to MAD and halt their progression (unless they get magic items). This way, not every schmuck with a 15 in a primary casting stat will be casting 9th level spells by the normal levels. Really, this only shows off how casting is normally represented, i.e. something that requires extrordinary control, and an extrordinary user.

EDIT: The CON is also an interesting and plausible idea, but it seems like it might be a bit much for most d4 classes. All the more reason to revamp the spellcasting classes completely, then.

Tarken
2007-08-12, 03:31 PM
I think the only person who would ever like this idea is my little brother's druid,Keldar, with 17int 17 wis and 18 cha (in case your wondering: str14 dex 17 con14 don't comment, i already know hes overpowered)

SithLackey
2007-08-12, 05:24 PM
Or people who enjoy warrior-types and dislike constantly being shown up by their spellcasting companions (and enemies).

Keledrath
2007-08-12, 05:26 PM
Lackey, Note that it's not me that does that.

It feels good to call you lackey.

SithLackey
2007-08-12, 06:01 PM
I didn't say you were capable of showing ANYONE up. :smalltongue: However, I would say you are more likely than most to end up with that kind of druid "out of sheer luck". (And I will never be your lackey, fool! *Crushes BookBoy with Force Grip*)

Reinboom
2007-08-12, 06:47 PM
I'm, once again, going to majorly disagree with the previous posts. To me, the only distinction it shows is the stat setting process used by groups. This will make spellcasters significantly better in high stat groups or groups that have that one lucky stat roller and significantly worse every time else. Of course, I dislike MAD in general - it really frustrates me when trying to build a character and the last thing I want to happen while playing a game is to be strictly frustrated.
It also does not really solve the power issue, for the moment you grab the two, relatively cheap, items it requires you to cast the high spells: poof ; programmed amnesia, shapechange, gate, time stop - led by foresight and celerity - all over again.

SithLackey
2007-08-12, 07:02 PM
At the very least, It's a step in the right direction. Right now, Primary spellcasters have really only one ability they HAVE to have. After they get that one, their spells (and, in the case of druids, other abilities) cover the gaps and do everything else. On the other hand, Warriors need STR and DEX to cover attacks,damage, and AC, CON for badly needed HP (because they cannot simply throw up a spell that guards them from whatever is threatening them), and maybe WIS for those pesky Will saves (or, in some cases, spells) or even INT or CHA to make the character more interesting. The idea is to give primary spellcasters something more than that one stat to worry about, thus making them harder to play.

I'll agree that this is not an ideal fix for game imbalance, but it does make it a little harder for the spellcasters to reach their formerly easy levels of supreme power. Also, I like the idea that the spellcasters need to come down in ease of power, as opposed to the seemingly prevalent attitude that fighters and other martial classes need to be crammed full of special abilities until they look cheesy enough to have come from TOB.

In other words: Keep up the good work Gezina!

Reinboom
2007-08-12, 07:10 PM
I agree that spellcasters need more stats. The two stat standard given by favored soul, for example. Make sorcerers Int and Cha based. Etc. They also need Con, otherwise they befall other issues too easily, and are way too squishy.
Mind, a full armored fighter doesn't take many stats either. Wis, and Cha are both dump stats. Int usually is as well. Dex is 12 or 14 (based on build). Con and str are primary. They are underpowered. To me, it shouldn't be the stats that define power - just help in it.

I think it would be more beneficial to say 'kill level 9 spells' then look at the spellcasting classes and try to work out other balances for them.

SithLackey
2007-08-12, 08:11 PM
I agree with most of what you're saying, but "kill level 9 spells", while definitely helping game balance a great deal, kills some of the flavor, too. I wish there was an easy way tomake them harder to get, but at the same time just as attainable. Perhaps use some kind of system where just studying hard enough to 'unlock their secrets' causes permanent physical stat drain. I just love the idea of the Emperor's body gradually decaying under the strain of all that yummy dark side power. Maybe do that and use some kind of nonlethal damage/cast system. Hmm... Maybe make casters give up either 1 point each or of one of the player's choice of STR, DEX, and CON for each (or every 2) 9th level spells they learn. Or, while my mind is heading "out there", even for every 10 total levels of spells you learn! The possibilities are endless. Also, I think the SRD (Unearthed Arcana) has a Sanity system, where spellcasting can be dangerous to your mental health.

Logic
2007-08-12, 10:18 PM
I tried a building a similar system, and so far it works.

I may take a few of your ideas to add to my own ruleset.

EDIT: These were what I had before.


Now, after having decided that casters in general are usually too powerful, the ideas I am eventually going to implement on a homebrew campaign setting will include the following rules for casters.
"Curse of the Magi" rule: A Caster must make a fortitude save (DC=10+level of the spell being cast) or become fatigued. If already fatigued, becomes exhausted. If already exhausted, becomes unconsious. If he fails by 10 or more, he moves 2 steps down the list.
One casting class. They would all be combined into a single class, and in order to get the special abilites of the druid, you would have to pick up a prestige class specific to the druid playstyle.
All the mental statistics are important to spellcasting, but in different areas.
The normal rule of "must have 10+spell level of X attribute in order to cast a spell of that level would be based upon schools or subschools. (Healing would be based upon wisdom, and blasting spells would be based on charisma, for example.)
Intellegence governs bonus spells known.
Wisdom governs bonus spells per day.
Charisma governs the most of the other abilities related to spells that are normally modified by an ability score.


Now, this gives spellcasters the problem of having Multiple Attribute Deficiency, but they would not be too terribly off if one of their attributes was not above average.

There are other things I have not considered yet, so your feedback is welcome.

SithLackey
2007-08-12, 10:32 PM
I like that. How many bonus spells known do they get? The same as bonus spells per day or what?

Also, the Fort save rule seems a little harsh. Perhaps spellcasters should get Great Fortitude as a bonus feat, or eventually gain immunity to the fatigue effects of the lower level spells. That way your average 10th level caster doesn't pass out because he rolled badly when casting 3 cantrips.

Logic
2007-08-12, 10:44 PM
I like that. How many bonus spells known do they get? The same as bonus spells per day or what?

Also, the Fort save rule seems a little harsh. Perhaps spellcasters should get Great Fortitude as a bonus feat, or eventually gain immunity to the fatigue effects of the lower level spells. That way your average 10th level caster doesn't pass out because he rolled badly when casting 3 cantrips.

I had been thinking of immunity to the curse when casting 0-level spells in the first place.

I was also thinking of a system when certain levels of spells the caster is no longer required to save against as he gains levels.

Perhaps at 4th CL, he no longer requires the save for 1st level spells, and every 4 levels thereafter, he adds the next higher level of spells to his immunity list. (8th CL=2nd level spells, 12 CL=3rd, 16=4th, 20=5th)