Input on homebrew drawback/boon for spheres of power

[Minwaabi]

I'm trying to create a couple of casting traditions for a homebrew campaign featuring Spheres of Power. And I'm wondering what other people think of this drawback and associated boon. Specifically, how many drawbacks would you consider each to be worth/cost? What other thoughts do you have about these casting traditions? Also, I mention "source of magic" - all casting traditions in this campaign require one drawback that's a valid "source of magic."

Drawback: Fount of magic

You possess an inner source of magic which refills your spell points once a day when you rest. As a result, you can be detected by detect magic or the base divine ability. Your aura strength is your Caster level associated with this magical tradition. Additionally, your ability to cast magic can be dispelled. For the purposes of dispel, you count as a magical item with your Caster level associated with this magical tradition. If you are dispelled, all spell effects that require concentration immediately end, and you may not cast spells associated with this tradition for 1d4 rounds. However, when a dispel check would force you to be destroyed, such as by Greater counterspell or Mage’s disjunction, you merely lose all spell points and spell-casting abilities. The next time you would normally gain spell points, you regain spell-casting abilities but no spell points. The day after that, you begin to regain spell points normally. You typically cannot regain spell points while in an anti-magic field or magical dead zone.

Finally, it should be noted that some spellcasters have devised ways to use your power to fuel their spells. Specifically, sphere casters who use a magical focus as their source of magic, and identify you as a source of magic may attempt a concentration check (DC 20 + 1/2 the caster level) combined with an opposed magical skill check to use your magic (including your spell points) to power their spells provided that they are in range to affect you with that spell. Additionally, some ritual casters have learned that your blood is particularly useful for powering their spells (every 2 spell points you have when sacrificed counts as an additional HD).

Boon: Independent Magic

Since you always bring your magic with you, you are less affected by anti-magic fields and magical dead zones than others.

When in an anti-magic field, you may spend a spell point to attempt a magical skill check against the anti-magic field. If you succeed, spells which you cast using this ability take effect normally if they target you or a touched target and have a duration of instantaneous. If the spell has a duration of concentration, you must succeed at a concentration check of (20 +½ CL of the spell you are trying to cast) and a magical skill check against the anti-magic field each round as part of the action to maintain the spell. Spells cast at targets outside the anti-magic field take effect normally. Finally, if a spell can be cast from outside an anti-magic field into an anti-magic field and take effect normally (such as a Stone Blast) the spell works as normal.

When in a magical dead zone you may spend an additional spell point to cast a spell that you would normally be able to cast using your fount of magic tradition. In a magical dead zone, spells which you cast using this ability take effect normally if they target you or a touched target and have a duration of instantaneous. If the spell has a duration of concentration, you must succeed at a concentration check of (15 +½ CL of the spell you are trying to cast.) each round as part of the action to maintain the spell. All other durations are reduced by one step (1 min/CL becomes 1rd/CL). All other ranges are reduced by 50%, with unlimited range spells being reduced to long. You may spend an additional spell point to return this to normal.

Finally, you regain spell points 1/5th as fast in an anti-magic field, and 1/10th as fast in a magical dead zone.

To select this boon, you must choose the "Fount of Magic" drawback as your source of magic.

[A.J.Gibson]

Font of Magic suffers from a breach of player-GM contract. No GM wants to hit the player with an effect that will knock out of the game for hours of real time.

[Mcdt2]

Disclaimer: I'm going into this assuming Spheres is the only magic that exists, at least in part because I don't remember enough of Vancian magic and how easily some of these restrictions can be bypassed.

Fount of Magic is assuredly worth at least 2 drawbacks, given how easily it can just be completely shut down. Being dispelled (without Greater Counterspell) is unfortunate, but this depends on exactly how often enemies can even detect this. Divination takes a full round, costs a spell point, and leaves you flat-footed. Sense Magic mitigates most of this, of course. How easily can someone tell the difference between someone having an aura because they are a Fount of Magic, or might someone think you merely are affected by a magical effect or are wearing magical armor? Does this require the Spellcraft check to identify, or is this automatic?

Greater Counterspell doesn't come into play until level 15 at the earliest (and requires an investment of 3 feats), which may never be reached anyhow. I think this is mostly fine, but I'd have the spellcasting and all SP recover at the same time, for ease of play if nothing else.

Having it possible for others to draw on their magic is a very interesting idea, I very much like it. Do note this technically means allied casters could easily use the Fount's points if he's willing. Certainly a thematic and cool effect, so long as you're aware of it.

[Talverin]

I definitely agree regarding the 'breach of contract' mentioned. As a GM, I honestly wouldn't like a player taking that drawback; I would assume they were counting on me never taking away their powers or attacking them in any significant way.

Unfortunately, this also means in the case of 'special' fights or big boss battles... your character is dead. If the first thing I do isn't to Greater Dispel or Disjunction you, then I'm giving you absolutely free drawback points with no penalty. But if I do this... Then I hope you've made a backup character to actually fight with, or you are SOL and will be spending the rest of the session rolling regular ol' attacks with no magic in them whatsoever.

Similarly, the Boon you can get from it, allowing you to cast inside Anti-Magic Fields. The AMF is an obstacle meant to shine a little light on Martial characters and peoples' mundane abilities. Things that circumvent it by design devalue the use of them overall, and defeat the point of using them.

Ever had somebody take the 'Animal Lover' flaw in a D&D game? I mean, how bad can it be, not being able to hurt animals, right? This is usually taken with the expectation that it won't be encountered. That you won't have to deal with regular animals. I've seen a six-person party, four of which had 'Animal Lover' as a cheap way to get an extra feat. Therefore, the DM threw lots and lots of animal encounters at us during our travels. Flaws are meant to penalize a character, and if the flaw doesn't innately do it, it's the DM's job.

If someone with Fount of Power doesn't get spell-drained regularly - whether by Dispel, Disjunction, or just some guy with Heighten Spell casting a CL (your spell point pool) fireball at your face - you're just getting free stuff.

Rather than it being worth points, perhaps the only balanced exchange would be getting the Boon in exchange for the Drawback, and then having a long conversation with your DM about how much not playing your spellcaster you're willing to do in a session.

[Minwaabi]

Font of Magic suffers from a breach of player-GM contract. No GM wants to hit the player with an effect that will knock out of the game for hours of real time.


I definitely agree regarding the 'breach of contract' mentioned. As a GM, I honestly wouldn't like a player taking that drawback; I would assume they were counting on me never taking away their powers or attacking them in any significant way.

Unfortunately, this also means in the case of 'special' fights or big boss battles... your character is dead. If the first thing I do isn't to Greater Dispel or Disjunction you, then I'm giving you absolutely free drawback points with no penalty. But if I do this... Then I hope you've made a backup character to actually fight with, or you are SOL and will be spending the rest of the session rolling regular ol' attacks with no magic in them whatsoever.

Ever had somebody take the 'Animal Lover' flaw in a D&D game? I mean, how bad can it be, not being able to hurt animals, right? This is usually taken with the expectation that it won't be encountered. That you won't have to deal with regular animals. I've seen a six-person party, four of which had 'Animal Lover' as a cheap way to get an extra feat. Therefore, the DM threw lots and lots of animal encounters at us during our travels. Flaws are meant to penalize a character, and if the flaw doesn't innately do it, it's the DM's job.

If someone with Fount of Power doesn't get spell-drained regularly - whether by Dispel, Disjunction, or just some guy with Heighten Spell casting a CL (your spell point pool) fireball at your face - you're just getting free stuff.

Rather than it being worth points, perhaps the only balanced exchange would be getting the Boon in exchange for the Drawback, and then having a long conversation with your DM about how much not playing your spellcaster you're willing to do in a session.

I guess I'm coming with a somewhat skewed perception of what a GM will and won't do because I've only ever once played the game with a player who wanted to play a cleric. And that one time we did play with a cleric, he wasn't very good at picking spells. Blinded wizard? Insane swashbuckler? Rogue got Ghoul Fever? Walk back to town and find a cleric who can fix the problem or wait a day for the cleric to prepare useful spells.

So do you see a problem with what dispel does (1d4 rounds no spellcasting) or just with mage’s disjunction and greater dispel? Because I'm not sure I see how those two are so much more powerful than other vanilla options at the level that those come online. Greater dispel is effectively an 8th level spell that requires 3 feats to use. Mage’s disjunction is 9th level. Baleful polymorph is only a 5th level spell to permanently turn you into a chicken that can't use somatic, verbal, or material spell components or items or worse turn you into an amphibious fish that can't move either. Is the problem that it's too powerful, or that there's no way to fix it outside of waiting 1d4 rounds, 1 min/CL, or 1 day? Would adding some way of removing or bypassing the condition (like still spell/silent spell) make this a better drawback?

Would you be uncomfortable with a player taking the following official drawback (why or why not):

Emotional Casting
Your magic requires heightened emotional states of mind to use. When subject to a non-harmless magical effect that invokes an emotion (such as fear effects, spells with the (emotion) descriptor, or charms such as Fear or Hostility) you are unable to use magic.


Similarly, the Boon you can get from it, allowing you to cast inside Anti-Magic Fields. The AMF is an obstacle meant to shine a little light on Martial characters and peoples' mundane abilities. Things that circumvent it by design devalue the use of them overall, and defeat the point of using them.

I guess I've always thought of anti-magic fields as a tool to shut down spellcasters/magic. However, with founts of magic this is the wrong tool for the job. Therefore, it still has a chance of working, but it's not as good as using the right tool. However, maybe this is too powerful. I honestly thought this was too weak. How often is someone going to cast AMF? Doesn't it neuter them too?


Fount of Magic is assuredly worth at least 2 drawbacks, given how easily it can just be completely shut down. Being dispelled (without Greater Counterspell) is unfortunate, but this depends on exactly how often enemies can even detect this. Divination takes a full round, costs a spell point, and leaves you flat-footed. Sense Magic mitigates most of this, of course. How easily can someone tell the difference between someone having an aura because they are a Fount of Magic, or might someone think you merely are affected by a magical effect or are wearing magical armor? Does this require the Spellcraft check to identify, or is this automatic?

Thematically, I would say it is a DC 16 - CL arcane knowledge check to identify your aura. (So this check gets easier as you get more powerful). This DC decreases by 5 if you cast a spell while being observed with divine magic/detect magic. However I'm not opposed to just treating those as automatic for simplicity. At any rate, you are automatically identifiable as some sort of magical curiosity worth further study without any sort of skill check while being observed with divine Magic/detect magic. I would make knowing the first paragraph of Fount of Knowledge a DC 15 Knowledge check and the second paragraph a DC 20. But that’s more based off how common this knowledge is than balancing the drawback.


Having it possible for others to draw on their magic is a very interesting idea, I very much like it. Do note this technically means allied casters could easily use the Fount's points if he's willing. Certainly a thematic and cool effect, so long as you're aware of it.

I really like this idea too. They would still have to make the concentration check, but the magical skill check can be skipped if the fount is willing. I should probably specify that that's just the usual concentration check for not using your own magical focus.

[stack]

How does it fit into your world? If there are only a handful of widespread traditions, then those with this flaw would be widely known and you would logically expect counters to be common. If it is a one-off or one of dozens of traditions in a kitchen-sink setting, then the balance changes a bit.

[Minwaabi]

How does it fit into your world? If there are only a handful of widespread traditions, then those with this flaw would be widely known and you would logically expect counters to be common. If it is a one-off or one of dozens of traditions in a kitchen-sink setting, then the balance changes a bit.

That's an excellent question. Right now I would say more towards the “one of dozens of magical traditions” side of things. However I'm still trying to figure that out. Part of that has to do with figuring out how viable/reasonable this particular casting tradition is. I really like the idea behind this drawback as a large part of this setting has to do with the questions: why is the magic dying? Why is it becoming more rare/harder to find and use? Where does it come from? How do we fix it? In any case, spell casters are relatively rare, and most are relatively secretive anyway. I would say 5-10% of all spell casters might have this as part of their tradition.

[Talverin]

Part of a GM's job is to prepare encounters against the party. AMF and 'dead magic' zones serve a very specific purpose: To create a situation where Casters can't just Cast their way out of trouble. It's meant to strain the party's abilities, or force them to creatively overcome an encounter where their normal tools (I cast a spell and we move on) don't apply.

Allowing someone to circumvent AMF is, ultimately, making it so you either don't use AMF at all, or when you do, you're basically telling the one Fount of Power guy, "Hey, this next bit is all about you. Everyone else should probably just stand back and wait for him to solve it."

Use of Dispel/Greater Dispel/Disjunction is uncommon, but is still a very valuable tool for Encounter-building: Serving a similar role to an AMF, but on a smaller and more temporary scale, Dispel allows you to suppress magical items that your players are using, giving the enemy a tactical advantage. There is a reason there are threads dedicated to spells protecting you from Dispel, and tricks for CL-stacking to prevent others from destroying/suppressing your favorite abilities.

Perhaps these are both situation that mainly happen around higher-OP tables, and that is why it seems less significant to prevent them.

In my opinion, however, all it does is remove tools from the DM's toolbox. AMF becomes irrelevant for the purpose of forcing the party to make do without magic, and Dispel goes from something generally useful to something you can never use on one of the party members - completely blowing away spellcasting ability for a day - which grants them a kind of non-mechanical immunity to Dispelling. Naturally, no one else is afforded this protection unless you choose not to use it at all, which favors the Fount of Power player.

Perhaps instead of Greater Dispel/Disjunction destroying their spellcasting ability, make it so it drains Spell Points instead? Or you can't spend spell points for 1 round, +1 round per 5 they beat your CL check by? Perhaps also losing 1 Spell Point per round that your powers are suppressed. That way it can remain a tactical tool, and become even more powerful than normal against this one character (appropriate for a drawback) without completely ending the character's usefulness for the day.

Functionally, there's very little difference between losing the powers for minutes, hours, or a day; generally this is just gonna result in them going, "Hey, uh, guys, I lost my magic. Camp and start up again tomorrow?"

I would also strongly say discard the 'magic the next day, SP the day after that'. All that will give you is a caster that wants the party to spend two whole days sitting around.

[stack]

Worth noting, antimagic field requires an advanced talent in SoP anyway, so is a non-issue if you are the GM and don't allow that talent. Protection has a lesser version as a basic talent, but it already allows an opposed check, so spending a boon to counter a single talent is...maybe not efficient?

Without you specifically allowing it to exist and employing it, the only way it would come up is if certain wild magic results trigger (I don't recall if any non-major events have dead magic), so the power of the boon is almost entirely up to you.