PDA

View Full Version : An attempt to balence out Sorcerers and wizards, using 2E methods



EvilElitest
2008-04-14, 10:46 PM
Right, now for the first time, i'm really trying to balance wizards in my world without taking away the general theme of the class. Now a few things i've been doing

1) Taking out broken spells/making certain spells weaker
2) evening out the different spell schools
3) spell amounts

you know the normal stuff. but my biggest problem stems from the fact that i like the flavor of the spells but i dislike the fact that balance is so absurd. however generally i like the unique spells and what they do an all that

Now i don't really want to go into detail about balencing wizards totally, but for the purpose of this thread i just want to even the gap between soccers and wizards a tad bit. I know this won't work, but my goals are

A) make them slightly more even. At least so that wizards isn't simply automatically just "better" than its counterpart as is currently the case
B) make them more unique while working within the system

So here is one of my minor ideas, in 2E, it apperently took wizards a lot of time to cast spells. So i wondered, if I

A) make casting time a bigger issue, along with the visible effects of teh spell a larger issue. Every spell has a different casting time and the difference between spell length and abilities. I remember in baldur's gate, where each spells casting time made a huge difference in my abilities. Every time i buffed up my party for a big fight for example, i had take the spell length and how long it took to cast compared to my other member's buffing spells into consideration so that right before i fought the beast i had the max buffs ready. Also my casters had to wait like a round between casting spells (or seemed like it) so it was a lot harder to utilize my spells in combat. It also felt kinda cool, more mythical and unique, and more magical if anyone can understand what i'm saying.
Also i liked how each spell had a somewhat unique casting. Healing spells showed a certain cross like symbol surrounded by a circle that took about 8 seconds to cast, while Melf' acid arrow was a greeen symbol that slowly came together into the shape of an arrow after about 10 seconds. If every spell has a unique signature that people can regonize, then they can prepare in the round before he casts. Magic missil was instantaneous however


So anyways, i'm thinking if i make the casting times of the spells more like their 2E counter parts. Longer and with distinct casting motions, flashiness, and words for wizards, it would help them be more mythical and slightly less powerful

b) Make spell components a bigger focus of the game. Enforce the rule more and make them a lot harder to obtain

C) make the amount of spells they learn per level less and force them to rely upon scrolls more for learning spells


In contrast, Sorcerers would have minimal casting time, all spells will have no flashiness (the sorcerer would would simply point and the spell would happen) and no spell components (as they draw their power from their blood)

Also They would have more Hit Dice and can be slightly better with weapons

its primitive i know, as i just thought about it, but do you think i could work off this formula?
from
EE

JupiterJazz
2008-04-14, 11:01 PM
Like all spells casting time is half their level rounded up to a minimum of 1, unless already higher, then use that time instead?

Edit:Quicken spell reduces this time by one round to a minimum of one, takes a slot one level higher but does not increase the effective spell level?

EvilElitest
2008-04-14, 11:03 PM
Like all spells casting time is half their level rounded up to a minimum of 1, unless already higher, then use that time instead?

no instead make every single spell have a specific casting time and signature casting style so people can regonize it. Wizards with feats of course can negate this, but i'm thinking this might make the two classes more distinct
from
EE

Reinboom
2008-04-14, 11:07 PM
The problem is that 3E's round mechanics are very very... not 2E.
You have 3-5 round encounters even without a wizard, though it can stretch a bit longer.
Unless the spell does something irreplaceable by another spell, increasing the casting time will only make that spell 'useless'. Adding a round on to most spells cut their effectiveness far more than just half.

Though, one spell that seems to be working in my current main campaign increase: teleport (to a 2 round casting time).

EvilElitest
2008-04-14, 11:08 PM
The problem is that 3E's round mechanics are very very... not 2E.
You have 3-5 round encounters even without a wizard, though it can stretch a bit longer.
Unless the spell does something irreplaceable by another spell, increasing the casting time will only make that spell 'useless'. Adding a round on to most spells cut their effectiveness far more than just half.

Though, one spell that seems to be working in my current main campaign increase: teleport (to a 2 round casting time).

Ah, that is hte problem, in my games combat tends to last a very long time, so i tend to forget
from
EE

JupiterJazz
2008-04-14, 11:08 PM
So you are just gonna run through each spell and randomly assign it a casting time? So if a wizard wants to cast a fireball he'll have to start like what 2 minutes in advance?

Could you put up an example of a spell you are thinking about?

EvilElitest
2008-04-14, 11:13 PM
So you are just gonna run through each spell and randomly assign it a casting time? So if a wizard wants to cast a fireball he'll have to start like what 2 minutes in advance?

Could you put up an example of a spell you are thinking about?

who says it was random. it would most likely be based upon its flaver




Ok lets have a few examples




Mage's armor, as a slight tribute to BG, takes a while to cast, making it a spell that a mage would really want to cast prior to combat
As the mage casts it, magical purple energy slowly wraps around his body and as he finishes the last words the whole things manifests as a transparent magical armor around his body.

Fire ball takes a little while to caste, as visible energy builds around the mages moving hands before launching out an explosion


Time stop takes a full scale ritual, involving lots of chanting and components

Magic missal is an instant spell, along with hold portal:smallwink:

i could go on but you get hte idea

edit

The idea is that envocter spells are faster actually, so fire ball would be pretty quick. However the more nasty and powerful spells taht tend to be broken will take a lot more time and effort
from
EE

JupiterJazz
2008-04-14, 11:20 PM
What would be the point of time stop then? Except maybe to bypass a trap, when there is way more effective spells to use for that anyways. Everyone would just pick a sorcerer if they get instantaneous 9th level spells compared to a wizard having to spend 3 hours on the same spell.

EvilElitest
2008-04-14, 11:23 PM
What would be the point of time stop then? Except maybe to bypass a trap, when there is way more effective spells to use for that anyways. Everyone would just pick a sorcerer if they get instantaneous 9th level spells compared to a wizard having to spend 3 hours on the same spell.

Because if you use it directly prior to a fight, well you have time stop, amazingly broken spell
Also it wouldn't be hours, i think the max time would be like ten mins, and that would be rare
Currently i'm just trying to see if the idea has appeal for balencing wizards somewhat
from
EE

Fostire
2008-04-14, 11:26 PM
In contrast, Sorcerers would have minimal casting time, all spells will have no flashiness (the sorcerer would would simply point and the spell would happen) and no spell components (as they draw their power from their blood)

Also They would have more Hit Dice and can be slightly better with weapons

its primitive i know, as i just thought about it, but do you think i could work off this formula?
from
EE

Wouldn't that make the sorceror much more powerful than the wizard or am i missing something, i mean they cast faster, are harder (impossible) to counter, they dont need components so they are ready full time, and are harder to kill. They just dont seem to have any drawbacks in their casting (aside from the reduced spell availability). This could be fixed by adding drawbacks like a chance for wild surges (just cause i love em).

PS: you misspelled balance in the title :smallwink:

Emperor Tippy
2008-04-14, 11:31 PM
Take the psion, strip out the required specilization, replace the Powers list with the Wizard/Sorcerer spell list, replace the class skills with the sorcerers class skills, replace the HD with the sorcerers HD.

Call it a sorcerer. Tada. Thats a better sorcerer.

Tehnar
2008-04-15, 03:06 AM
From what I remember from AD&D 2nd edition (its been a while) is that initative was rolled from round to round. You threw a D10 and added modifiers, lowest modifier goes first (a dagger had a mod of 1, a greatsword 10 i think, spells had a modifier based on their lvl 1 for lvl 1 spells, 2 for lvl 2 etc,..). Since you had to declare your actions before the round started, and combined with the fact that any dmg a caster takes during the round before his turn automaticaly interupts his spellcasting, casting higher lvl spells was a hazard.

Example:

Joe the wizard says he will cast a lvl 6 spell, while Bob the rogue says he will attack Joe with his dagger.
Joe rolls D10+6, whiel Bob rolls D10+1 for initiative. Lets say Joe got a 11 and Bob got a 8. So what would happen is Bob would attack Joe, and if he hit Joe he would interrupt his casting for that round (making him lose that spell slot).

Premier
2008-04-15, 05:03 AM
Another huge aspect of spellcaster power is the time required to memorize spells. In 3.5, it simply takes 1 hour, regardless of whether you're trying to memorize a single Magic Missile or about 20 levels' worth of magic.

Contrast this with AD&D 1E. First, the magic user must be rested and nourished (so no memorizing if you're lost and starving in the wilderness). Then, he must spend 15 minutes per spell level on memorization.

This introduces a strong element of resource allocation (that resource being time) that gets more and more pronounced as you increase in level. In 3.5, your high level mage can just teleport the party into the dungeon, fire off his whole spell complement in a stunning display of firepower, teleport out, then repeat the next morning. In AD&D, a 15th level magic user who does the same would require 7 hours over and above resting, almost a full third of a day! In any situation where time is a critical factor, or where enemies might be aware of the party's presence and making preparations, the magic user needs to be thrifty with his spells, since he cannot afford the luxury of taking his sweet time rememorizing them. Not to mention that his party members will be docked for the same amount of time. And then there are wandering monsters...

Skjaldbakka
2008-04-15, 05:14 AM
My current strategy (still in progress), is to rework the spell progression so that you get 7th level spells at 20th level. I'm also giving each specialist school its own spell list (making certain spells lower level, and other spells higher level, based on the power of the spell, and the specialist's school).

Fireball is a 2nd level spell for Evokers in this system, for example.

hamlet
2008-04-15, 08:07 AM
Casting times were a major issue for wizards as long as you used the optional initiative rules. Specifically, everybody rolls initiative every round on a d10. You add modifiers for high dex, situational modifiers, weapon speeds, and casting times (really, there were only two or three modifiers that applied at any one time, so it was even then very simple). The modified number was the order in which you went that round from lowest to highest.

This meant that the faster wizard who was trying to cast a complicated and involved spell might still finish the casting after the slow fighter managed to bring his three-foot steel blade down on the magic user's skull. If the mage took damage during that time before his spell was completed, but after he had started it, he lost the spell (and the spell slot).

It was an incredibly good way to balance casters. Phenomenal cosmic power came with a serious limitation.


My current strategy (still in progress), is to rework the spell progression so that you get 7th level spells at 20th level. I'm also giving each specialist school its own spell list (making certain spells lower level, and other spells higher level, based on the power of the spell, and the specialist's school).

Fireball is a 2nd level spell for Evokers in this system, for example.

Hackmaster already has this in their magic user splat book.

Pronounceable
2008-04-15, 09:38 AM
I'm quite certain adnd casting wasn't exactly like that, though I have no proof. Maybe it was one of the countless variants?

I remember that initiative was rolled once at the start. Every spell had casting time (which was quite random afaik), which permenantly increased caster's initiative. A 6 timed spell cast on initiative count 9 would go off at initiative count 15. Caster's next turn would be at count 15. If it's more than 20, subtract 20 from it. Spell goes off next round on that count. Caster takes damage in between, spell is lost.


Emphasizing spell components would be needless bookkeeping, where something that lessens paperwork would be appreciated.


And one extremely important aspect of adnd was that spells had drawbacks. Intraclassial balance was not an issue, a wiz11 was certainly better than ftr11, while a wiz1 was pathetic compared to ftr1. And it was all good and proper. So they'd put more counters to magic. Most famous'd be haste I think.

3e doesn't implicitly support player inconvenience like 2e did. TSR didn't think that punishing the players would be negative overall. Adding random (even if logical) drawbacks and side effects to spells will not sit well with well bred 3e players.

Cainen
2008-04-15, 09:40 AM
A better idea for implementing casting along those lines - assign a casting time to each spell, and make the spell go off at Wizard's Initiative-Casting Time. So, for instance, if you have 10 Initiative and Wizard McBeardson casts Magic Missile(which, for this example, has a casting time of 5), anyone with an initiative of 5-9 will be able to hit him to stop him from casting. Changing Concentration DCs would be a good idea, too.

As someone who loved how 2E handled initiative and casting yet is forced to bend to lazy players, I fully understand why you'd want to fix this.

Dervag
2008-04-15, 10:37 AM
Another huge aspect of spellcaster power is the time required to memorize spells. In 3.5, it simply takes 1 hour, regardless of whether you're trying to memorize a single Magic Missile or about 20 levels' worth of magic.

Contrast this with AD&D 1E. First, the magic user must be rested and nourished (so no memorizing if you're lost and starving in the wilderness). Then, he must spend 15 minutes per spell level on memorization.

This introduces a strong element of resource allocation (that resource being time) that gets more and more pronounced as you increase in level. In 3.5, your high level mage can just teleport the party into the dungeon, fire off his whole spell complement in a stunning display of firepower, teleport out, then repeat the next morning. In AD&D, a 15th level magic user who does the same would require 7 hours over and above resting, almost a full third of a day! In any situation where time is a critical factor, or where enemies might be aware of the party's presence and making preparations, the magic user needs to be thrifty with his spells, since he cannot afford the luxury of taking his sweet time rememorizing them. Not to mention that his party members will be docked for the same amount of time. And then there are wandering monsters...This is about what I was hoping EE would suggest when I saw the thread. I like this idea, and have said so before.

EE's suggestion (which seems to revolve around casting times) might very well work, but it sounds complicated. Whereas a rule like "15 (or 10, or 20, or whatever) minutes are needed to memorize one level of spells" is relatively simple. Here are some of the advantages of this:

-It does not increase the combat bookkeeping load. You don't have to keep track of how many rounds the wizard has spent casting his spell
-It's easier to balance. By changing the time requirement, we can either make this a trivial requirement (reduce the time to, say, 2 minutes per spell level), or a huge requirement (30 minutes per spell level). We can make the number whatever it needs to be to balance the sorceror with the wizard. Whereas in EE's proposed system, it will be difficult to balance the wizard and the sorcerer because we're tweaking every spell in the game. How will we know when we've made wizard casting times too long?

That said, EE's idea does have a really neat selling point- it splits the roles of the sorcerer and wizard. The sorcerer's rapid casting will make him much more powerful than the wizard in combat. If a wizard and a sorcerer spontaneously appear and start fighting, the sorcerer usually wins. But the wizard has a more flexible spell inventory, which makes them better out of combat or in situations where they have time to prepare.

Think about most of the archetypal stories involving magicians. Usually, they have the magician make their main contribution by buffing up the heroes before the battle or by coming to the battle with just the right preparations and knowledge to win.

So I can see that working, but it would be very hard to make wizards and sorcerers balance mechanically in that way. So I prefer the 'time spent per level memorized' rule because it's simpler and easier to balance.


I'm quite certain adnd casting wasn't exactly like that, though I have no proof. Maybe it was one of the countless variants?

I remember that initiative was rolled once at the start. Every spell had casting time (which was quite random afaik), which permenantly increased caster's initiative. A 6 timed spell cast on initiative count 9 would go off at initiative count 15. Caster's next turn would be at count 15. If it's more than 20, subtract 20 from it. Spell goes off next round on that count. Caster takes damage in between, spell is lost.My 2nd Edition player's handbook used a d10 for the initiative, not a d20. There's a good reason for this: there were officially 10 six-second "segments" in a round (yes, rounds were a full minute). If you look at the casting times, the ones with casting times less than one round all have single digit numbers, because a casting time of more than ten segments is one round or more.

I'm not sure if having something happen on "segment 13" meant having it happen "next round on segment 3" or not, though it should have logically. After all, some weapons had a weapon speed greater than or equal to 10. Weapon speed was the fighter's version of casting time- each weapon had its own value that was added to the fighter's initiative roll to determine order of operations.


A better idea for implementing casting along those lines - assign a casting time to each spell, and make the spell go off at Wizard's Initiative-Casting Time. So, for instance, if you have 10 Initiative and Wizard McBeardson casts Magic Missile(which, for this example, has a casting time of 5), anyone with an initiative of 5-9 will be able to hit him to stop him from casting. Changing Concentration DCs would be a good idea, too.

As someone who loved how 2E handled initiative and casting yet is forced to bend to lazy players, I fully understand why you'd want to fix this.Viable, but the math is a bit confusing in my opinion. You have to determine the time the wizard is casting retroactively from the moment the spell is loosed. That seems to me as backwards, even though it probably works as well as doing it the other way around.

Sort of like how many people have trouble with the way that, in Alternity, you wanted to roll low, so bonuses let you subtract from your die roll in hopes of getting your skill score or lower.

Alternity was one of the conceptual precursors to d20, and some of its content seems to have gotten recycled into d20 Modern and Future. However, the mechanics seem awkward at first sight and some people never get the hang of it, though I never had any trouble.

Human Paragon 3
2008-04-15, 10:41 AM
I'd just like to point out that in 2e casting time did not effect how many rounds it took to cast a spell, it was an initiative penalty. Remember, in 2e, initiative was rerolled every round, and if a wizard was hit by an attack before they cast their spell, the spell was lost, so an initiative penalty was a big deal.

Some spells specificalyl stated that casting time was Xrounds or Xminutes, but a casting time of, for example, 5 was just a -5 initiative penalty in the round the spell was cast.

EDIT: Ah, I see this was stated above already. Well, the point stands.

Thinker
2008-04-15, 10:53 AM
EE, your idea is a bad one. Any combat spell with a longer cast-time becomes worthless. Any non-combat spell with a longer cast time doesn't matter. Its not fun just standing there waiting to cast a spell, especially when the fight is over in a couple of rounds.

Wizard: I cast Fireball! <begins casting>
Fighter: I charge the Dragon <charges>
Rogue: I Sneak Attack the Dragon <SA's>
Druid: I charge the Dragon <charges>
Dragon: <keels over>
Wizard: <finishes casting>
Rest of Party: aah!

Under your "system" you make the wizard redundant and it would be better off if you just eliminated the class altogether.

SBLaxman
2008-04-15, 10:55 AM
The ad&d system worked great, if you like it. However, if you want to run it in 3.x, you will need to change the whole system. Initiative must be rolled each round, not once per battle. The round typically goes like this:

-Party all declares actions (i attack, i cast fireball, i cast CLW)
-DM silently declares npc/monster actions (roar, swing ax, eat cleric)
-Initiative is rolled. This can be done 2 ways, either each pc/npc/monster rolls. Or, for a faster game (the way I play it), is each side rolls once, and that number is used for the party/enemy)
-modifiers are added/subtracted for each member (+1 for a dagger, +10 for a greatsword, +1 for magic missile (it's a quick spell), +6 for another spell, -something if you are hasted, +something slowed, etc). This is usually pretty quick, the melee guys usually use the same weapon or two, so they know their modifiers, just need to have a note for the spell speed.
-actions are then played out, with the character w/ the lowest initiative going first. If a caster is struck before he gets his spell off, his spell is disrupted and lost. You could involve concentration skill here to lower that chance in 3.x.

Most spells have casting times relative to their power. Powerful spells have casting times of 9 or 10, low power spells have times of 1 to 3. Powerword spells are all time=1 I think (just one word).

Weapon speed is optional, some people love it, some hate it. Spells never take more than 1 round to cast (except for a few non-combat spells). They just take a few moments to cast so don't occur right away (need to find that pearl, then invoke the powers that be, change the right words, crush the pearl and toss the dust in the air while waving his hands... doesn't happen right away)

valadil
2008-04-15, 11:00 AM
I like the idea that spells take initiative time rather than rounds. However I'm not a big fan of declaring actions, then rolling initiative, then resolving actions.

So maybe instead you could meet in the middle somewhere. Everyone rolls init. On the caster's action he declares what spell he'd like to cast. On his init minus the spells time, it goes off. You might even be able to use a spell's level as its casting time. So a wizard with an initiative of 20 casting a 5th level spell has the spell go off on the 15.

Alternatively, to balance them you could give the sorcerer some of the wizard's advantages. Wizards get bonus feats every five levels. They learn spells one level earlier. They don't take a full round to use metamagic. And they can learn new spells. Why not just give the sorcerer the bonus feats, fast metamagic from PHB2, and an ability to retrain spells? Like they can learn a spell off a scroll as a wizard does, but they'd have to swap out an old spell. This would be something that could be done at any time (maybe it would take a while to prevent them from swapping spells between fights - one day per level of spell could work). See how that plays out and then decide whether to adjust the levels they gain spells.

EvilElitest
2008-04-15, 11:08 AM
This is about what I was hoping EE would suggest when I saw the thread. I like this idea, and have said so before.

EE's suggestion (which seems to revolve around casting times) might very well work, but it sounds complicated. Whereas a rule like "15 (or 10, or 20, or whatever) minutes are needed to memorize one level of spells" is relatively simple. Here are some of the advantages of this:

-It does not increase the combat bookkeeping load. You don't have to keep track of how many rounds the wizard has spent casting his spell
-It's easier to balance. By changing the time requirement, we can either make this a trivial requirement (reduce the time to, say, 2 minutes per spell level), or a huge requirement (30 minutes per spell level). We can make the number whatever it needs to be to balance the sorceror with the wizard. Whereas in EE's proposed system, it will be difficult to balance the wizard and the sorcerer because we're tweaking every spell in the game. How will we know when we've made wizard casting times too long?

Yeah, I totally forgot about that idea. that might be more effective actually.



That said, EE's idea does have a really neat selling point- it splits the roles of the sorcerer and wizard. The sorcerer's rapid casting will make him much more powerful than the wizard in combat. If a wizard and a sorcerer spontaneously appear and start fighting, the sorcerer usually wins. But the wizard has a more flexible spell inventory, which makes them better out of combat or in situations where they have time to prepare.

Also hte wizard will have more spell options available to them

I think premeirs idea is great, it also makes things less unequal with the wizard/non casters


For example, lets say the wizard attacks a band of paladins, but is driven back due to lack of spells. However only one paladins lived. In mearly 8 hours, he is going to be killed by hte wizard. However with the system you mentioned, it will take hte wizard out of action for a lot longer

Right, so maybe we should try to find a compromise

Soluations ideas

Do you think things would work better if you incorporated the 2E initiative mechanics? Or would that be too clunky/confusing?

What i'm thinking with the wizard spells might be the length of their schools. . Envocers would have a shorter casting time while Conjurers would have a longer one. Or it might be by level, or just the nature of teh spell. Does anyone have an interesting compromise or way to manage it. I just think that if hte idea could be pulled off it might make wizards less absurd




Wizards
1) take longer to prepare spells
2)Need components
3) Cast longer
4) have many many more spells
5) can learn new spells via scrolls
6) weak in melee with low hit points
7) have school of magic
8) They use a spell book
9) Need to prepare spells
10) use Int for spells
Sorcerers
1) Prepare spells in an hour
2) cast must faster
3) don't need components
4) have more spell slots but much less spells
5) Can cast scrolls but can't learn spells from them
6) More Hit Dice and maybe they could wear light armor and use basic weapons. I mean they don't work like Wizards but more like clerics in my mind
7) No magic schools
8) no spell book
9) use Chrisma
10) can cast spells instantly

Any surggestions on how to work with this and if this is effective?
from
EE

Thinker
2008-04-15, 11:11 AM
Just leave it as-is and modify the sorceror rather than the wizard. Improve the sorceror, don't reduce the wizard. Definitely don't try to do both. There are always unforseen variables whenever you change something that affects/is affected by so much.

EvilElitest
2008-04-15, 11:12 AM
Thinker, problems stems from that my combat tends to take longer, which if forgot to consider
from
EE
Edit

What i was hoping was th generally balence out wizards a tad bit more. I don't know if this attempt would work sadly

Thinker
2008-04-15, 11:34 AM
Try True20. Their caster is balanced. Short of reworking the class and spell-list from the ground up, you're not going to have a balanced wizard.

ashmanonar
2008-04-15, 01:35 PM
Think about most of the archetypal stories involving magicians. Usually, they have the magician make their main contribution by buffing up the heroes before the battle or by coming to the battle with just the right preparations and knowledge to win.


I think this is a great point.

In most epic adventures, the wizard isn't rushing into combat (Gandalf is a notable exception) but rather figuring out what kind of enemies he's gonna face and preparing everything he can to defeat that enemy. Harry Dresden (of the Dresden Files) is a great example of this. He says in the books, several times, that a wizard isn't all that much tougher than the standard mortal, but that they're wise, and can use their knowledge to prepare themselves to fight things that are much greater or more dangerous than they are.

Dervag
2008-04-15, 01:49 PM
For example, lets say the wizard attacks a band of paladins, but is driven back due to lack of spells. However only one paladins lived. In mearly 8 hours, he is going to be killed by hte wizard. However with the system you mentioned, it will take hte wizard out of action for a lot longerNot that much longer- the wizard won't need all day to memorize enough spells to kill one paladin. However, a high level wizard might need much of a day in order to memorize their entire arsenal of spells.


Do you think things would work better if you incorporated the 2E initiative mechanics? Or would that be too clunky/confusing?I really don't think casting times are the problem. It would be too much work to come up with a balanced casting time for every spell in the books. To make matters worse, if the casting time for wizards is more than one round they're pretty well crippled. They'll be casting a spell in reaction to the situation in one round and then having it go off in the next- when their target may be dead or in melee with allies, for instance. They won't be able to fire more than one to three spells in a typical encounter, either. Sorcerers would totally dominate them in that case.


What i'm thinking with the wizard spells might be the length of their schools. . Envocers would have a shorter casting time while Conjurers would have a longer one. Or it might be by level, or just the nature of teh spell. Does anyone have an interesting compromise or way to manage it. I just think that if hte idea could be pulled off it might make wizards less absurdDoing it by level or by school would be a bit better, but the problem here is that wizards aren't radically more absurd than other caster classes. Cutting their ability to cast spells in a given encounter to one half or one third its former value hurts them too much. It also makes a lot of the wizard's spell slots useless. By the time the wizard runs into enough combat to use all their spells then the other party members have probably been beaten to death.


Wizards
1) take longer to prepare spells
2)Need components
3) Cast longer
4) have many many more spells
5) can learn new spells via scrolls
6) weak in melee with low hit points
7) have school of magic
8) They use a spell book
9) Need to prepare spells

Sorcerers
1) Prepare spells in an hour
2) cast must faster
3) don't need components
4) have more spell slots but much less spells
5) Can cast scrolls but can't learn spells from them
6) More Hit Dice and maybe they could wear light armor and use basic weapons.
7) No magic schools
8) no spell book
10) can cast spells instantlyTrying to balance those is going to be tricky. I think you're better off changing one parameter in the wizard's mechanics (the time it takes to rememorize spells). Then play-test that a bit and see if it works. If you try to change something very fundamental like casting times, you're more likely to overshoot than to get it right.

If you could do it perfectly and if 3rd Edition rules said more about the internal structure of the round, it would work. But if it's done imperfectly it's likely to make things worse.

EvilElitest
2008-04-15, 03:26 PM
1) I was kinda thinking the casting time as a general casting nerf all around actually. Maybe Sorcerers could have it too but warlocks don't.

Meh, i just find the idea of each spell having a signature casting that people could regonize as really cool

"oh damn, he is casting dire charm."
"Alright, that guy is readying a mage armor, i have 8 seconds to get to him"
"Is that a time stop. Oh bugger"
Sort of thing. But i see your point

The problem about the play test is taht it has worked in my groups so far. However my groups are generally very untypical and don't really have the desire to powergame normally. They like the idea for the uniqueness. So i couldn't know
from
EE

kme
2008-04-15, 05:20 PM
Changing casting times of all spell and giving them unique signatures would be too much work. And even if you do it, it is pointless unless your players actually look at those changes and memorize majority them.
Reducing the power of wizards can be easier. For example, if you remove 2 free spells that wizards get per level you can make sure that they don't get most powerful spells (maybe you can give them later when they are not so strong). Maybe even disallowing specialist wizards. Also, by limiting their ways of boosting DCs(primary by stats) you can discourage them from taking save or loose/die spells. You should also take into account that much of their power lies in items. Banning rods of metamagic and increasing the cost of stats boosting items can weaken casters a lot. Well, increasing casting time for some spells, can be a good idea (solid fog, teleport, wall spells, or some other no save but significant spells).
But if you want to have balance in your games you should never allow things such as arcane thesised twined maximized empowered energy admixtured split ray orb spells or enervation or similar cheese that is simply not intended.

EvilElitest
2008-04-15, 05:24 PM
Changing casting times of all spell and giving them unique signatures would be too much work. And even if you do it, it is pointless unless your players actually look at those changes and memorize majority them.
Reducing the power of wizards can be easier. For example, if you remove 2 free spells that wizards get per level you can make sure that they don't get most powerful spells (maybe you can give them later when they are not so strong). Maybe even disallowing specialist wizards. Also, by limiting their ways of boosting DCs(primary by stats) you can discourage them from taking save or loose/die spells. You should also take into account that much of their power lies in items. Banning rods of metamagic and increasing the cost of stats boosting items can weaken casters a lot. Well, increasing casting time for some spells, can be a good idea (solid fog, teleport, wall spells, or some other no save but significant spells).
But if you want to have balance in your games you should never allow things such as arcane thesised twined maximized empowered energy admixtured split ray orb spells or enervation or similar cheese that is simply not intended.
yeah i know, this was just a rather amateurish attempt to keep the flavor of the wizard while making them weaker. Aw well
from
EE

Draco Ignifer
2008-04-15, 06:12 PM
You could just make casting a spell subtract that spell level from your initiative for the round, with no need to reroll - the spellcaster begins casting, no matter what, on his initiative turn, and then finishes either before or after people can react depending on how quick he is and the spell he's casting is.

Also, it mght be fair to increase concentration difficulties by spell level^3/2, rather than just spell level - +1 at 1, +3 at 2, +5 at 3, +8 at 4, +11 at 5, +15 at 6, +18 at 7, +23 at 8, +27 at 9. Even a weak dagger throw means that you face a DC of 38 if you want to cast a ninth level spell, and if you add in the spellcasting time, you may actually get some possibility of inflicting it.

Xuincherguixe
2008-04-15, 06:16 PM
Here's one thought.

Given a week or so of preparation time, Sorcerers can change the spells they cast. The idea is that it's long enough that it's inappropriate to do while on a mission, but might be between them. Or when there is conveniently enough time to do some setting up before embarking on the next part of the plot.


Wizards in this case would still be more able to switch out their spells, and the Sorcerer needs to really think about which ones they pick since changing them isn't easy, however it does make them a bit more adaptable.

I'm of the idea that spell usage isn't "memorization" and "brain damage" after use anyways, but rather various rituals that put the appropriately configured energy patterns ready for use. Sorcerers would just utilize those patterns in a slightly different way. Pumping the energy through some special mechanism, which creates that pattern and applies it at the same time.


How much difference this would make is questionable, especially considering they can already do that between levels.

Cainen
2008-04-15, 11:39 PM
Viable, but the math is a bit confusing in my opinion.

How is that even remotely confusing? The spell takes effect at the Wizard's initiative(which he should be keeping track of anyways!) minus the spellcasting time. I don't see how it could possibly be considered confusing, no matter how you're trying to push it.


You have to determine the time the wizard is casting retroactively from the moment the spell is loosed.

No, you cast then wait until it pops up later in the turn. So whenever Wizard McBeardson gets his turn, he casts Magic Missile(again, an example, this should be a fast spell in all reality). He's casting MM from the initiative ratings inbetween 10-15, and the spell is actually finished at 10. It's a crude implementation of a tick system, and the only thing that has to be determined is when the spell goes off.

Skjaldbakka
2008-04-15, 11:49 PM
I'm of the idea that spell usage isn't "memorization" and "brain damage" after use anyways, but rather various rituals that put the appropriately configured energy patterns ready for use. Sorcerers would just utilize those patterns in a slightly different way. Pumping the energy through some special mechanism, which creates that pattern and applies it at the same time.

I've always seen spell preperation as part of the casting of the spell. A wizard casts all but the last few critical parts of the spells he prepares, and in combat, releases the spell by finishing the incantation.

Admittedly, this explanation suffered a bit with the change to spell preperation time in 3E.

Dervag
2008-04-16, 08:53 PM
How is that even remotely confusing? The spell takes effect at the Wizard's initiative(which he should be keeping track of anyways!) minus the spellcasting time. I don't see how it could possibly be considered confusing, no matter how you're trying to push it.Not so much confusing as counterintuitive, I guess.

I could learn to do it, but I learned to play Alternity too. The problem is mostly just that it expands bookkeeping requirements- and if casters have to keep track of how long their actions take to perform lest they be interrupted, shouldn't noncasters who do something like drink a potion or activate a device during combat?

hamlet
2008-04-17, 06:59 AM
Not so much confusing as counterintuitive, I guess.

I could learn to do it, but I learned to play Alternity too. The problem is mostly just that it expands bookkeeping requirements- and if casters have to keep track of how long their actions take to perform lest they be interrupted, shouldn't noncasters who do something like drink a potion or activate a device during combat?

I dont' see how it's counterintuitive.

The wizard rolls initiative and chooses the spell he wishes to cast.

On his initiative, he begins to cast his spell.

The spell is completed and "happens" x initiative counts after the wizards initiative where x is the casting time.

So, if the wizard casts magic missile, which has casting time 1, and rolls an 18 for initiative: he starts casting at 18 and finishes at 17 when the spell "goes off."

Not in the least bit confusing, and the extra book keeping? About 1 extra character.