changing SAD to MAD

[Fitz10019]

I figure if you can't fix MAD, create balance by changing SAD. I'm thinking of requiring casters to have the same Con requirement as their primary casting ability requirement.

Normal: a wizard with Int 16 and Con (any) can only cast up to 6th level spells

with additional Con requirement: a wizard Int 16 and Con 14 can only cast up to 4th level spells

The fluff is that mental preparation is only half the battle -- your body must be sturdy enough to be a conduit for magic. Casting a spell beyond your Con limit causes you [spell level]d6 damage.

This can't be a new idea, so I'm asking if anyone has any experience with this. Good, bad, pointless?

Edit: point-buy assumed

[Mongoose87]

Con is already the second-highest attribute for most casters. Also, this could be very un-fun, if poor rolling keeps you from ever accessing higher level spells.

[Zovc]

Favored Souls cast spells based on Charisma, but their spells' saves are derived from their Wisdom.

Just saying...

[Optimystik]

Fine for high tiers (like Wizard.) Would screw over the lower ones (like Warmage.)

You're basically applying the Point Buy Tier Fix (Option #1 under House Rules) indirectly, where the higher tiers get lower point buy.

[Sliver]

Some people might be against losing the 'old frail looking wizard' archetype...

[drengnikrafe]

Back in 2e, IIRC, you had to have certain stats to qualify for various specialist wizard types. Like Illusionists needed good intelligence, plus good dexterity, or something like that. While the idea could be good in theory, it basically stopped anyone from playing what they actually wanted.

[Draz74]

You're basically applying the Point Buy Tier Fix (Option #1 under House Rules) indirectly, where the higher tiers get lower point buy.

... except you're also giving the top tiers with their "lower point buy" bonus HP and Fortitude save bonuses.

Seriously, this "fix" does nothing. Optimized Wizards all end up with a CON score of at least 18 anyway. Boosting that up to 19 isn't all that hard. Same with Druids and Clerics.

[RagnaroksChosen]

I would take the favored soul as an example and make it so that wizards have to have int to cast there spells but there dc is con or chrisma or something else based.

sorcerers could be con/cha

etc,etc

[sonofzeal]

How does this sound:


Int determines bonus spells, and what spells you can cast. DC is determined by....

Abjuration: Con (durability; plus there's not that many Abj with DCs)
Conjuration: Wis (since it covers situational awareness)
Divination: Int (nothing else really fits)
Enchantment: Cha (manipulation)
Evocation: Con (it's tough on your body to channel hellfire, maybe)
Illusion: Wis (awareness again)
Necromancy: Cha (see: Dread Necro)
Transmutation: Str (since so many are focused on augmenting force)
Universal: Int (except when mimicking a spell from another school via Wish or whatnot)

[Sstoopidtallkid]

I figure if you can't fix MAD, create balance by changing SAD. I'm thinking of requiring casters to have the same Con requirement as their primary casting ability requirement.

Normal: a wizard with Int 16 and Con (any) can only cast up to 6th level spells

with additional Con requirement: a wizard Int 16 and Con 14 can only cast up to 4th level spells

The fluff is that mental preparation is only half the battle -- your body must be sturdy enough to be a conduit for magic. Casting a spell beyond your Con limit causes you [spell level]d6 damage.

This can't be a new idea, so I'm asking if anyone has any experience with this. Good, bad, pointless?

Pointless. Most casters go after a 14 con minimum anyways, so they'd just need a +2 item at level 9, +4 at level 13, and +6 at level 16. That's about 2 levels before most people would buy them anyways.

And then there's Druids...

[Glimbur]

How does this sound:


Int determines bonus spells, and what spells you can cast. DC is determined by....

Abjuration: Con (durability; plus there's not that many Abj with DCs)
Conjuration: Wis (since it covers situational awareness)
Divination: Int (nothing else really fits)
Enchantment: Cha (manipulation)
Evocation: Con (it's tough on your body to channel hellfire, maybe)
Illusion: Wis (awareness again)
Necromancy: Cha (see: Dread Necro)
Transmutation: Str (since so many are focused on augmenting force)
Universal: Int (except when mimicking a spell from another school via Wish or whatnot)

So now the formula for calculating DC's is more complicated. That's workable, but a bit irritating.

The real problem with this is that it doesn't fix the bigger problems. There are many, many spells worth casting that don't offer a save, so coming from a school with a lower save DC due to your character's stats doesn't matter. I would be content to run a high Int and Con wizard with these rules; I could get by only casting spells with saves from Divination, Abjuration (not that there are many), and Evocation.

[Grumman]

How does this sound:

Too much work for not enough payoff, IMO.

[Milskidasith]

So now the formula for calculating DC's is more complicated. That's workable, but a bit irritating.

The real problem with this is that it doesn't fix the bigger problems. There are many, many spells worth casting that don't offer a save, so coming from a school with a lower save DC due to your character's stats doesn't matter. I would be content to run a high Int and Con wizard with these rules; I could get by only casting spells with saves from Divination, Abjuration (not that there are many), and Evocation.

Don't forget conjuration, since the conjuration spells are either orbs (no save no SR damage) or summons (no save just get grappled by my 2 colossal centipedes. Malconvoking rocks.)

[sonofzeal]

So now the formula for calculating DC's is more complicated. That's workable, but a bit irritating.

The real problem with this is that it doesn't fix the bigger problems. There are many, many spells worth casting that don't offer a save, so coming from a school with a lower save DC due to your character's stats doesn't matter. I would be content to run a high Int and Con wizard with these rules; I could get by only casting spells with saves from Divination, Abjuration (not that there are many), and Evocation.

You could "get by", but I think we can agree it would be a drop in power. Conj and Necro still have a lot of no-save effects, and Trans has a lot of "(harmless)", but the schools as a whole become rather weaker. Even Abjuration and Evocation suffer a bit, as your Con is not likely to be quite as high as your Int for most conventional wizards. Most good "Save or Lose" now become much more dubious (Glitterdust, Baleful Polymorph, Charm Person, Dominate Person, Friend to Foe, Shadow Evocation/Conjuration, Phantasmal Strangler, Fear, Magic Jar), and this restricts your list of tactics somewhat. Since Wizards depend on their versatility, I think that's a good thing.

[Zovc]

Universal: Int (except when mimicking a spell from another school via Wish or whatnot)

I see nothing wrong with rewarding a player for jumping through hoops. Let all universal spells use Intelligence.

[Person_Man]

Or you could just talk to the players in your group who want to play a full caster, and ask them to tone down their spell selection.

[RagnaroksChosen]

How does this sound:


Int determines bonus spells, and what spells you can cast. DC is determined by....

Abjuration: Con (durability; plus there's not that many Abj with DCs)
Conjuration: Wis (since it covers situational awareness)
Divination: Int (nothing else really fits)
Enchantment: Cha (manipulation)
Evocation: Con (it's tough on your body to channel hellfire, maybe)
Illusion: Wis (awareness again)
Necromancy: Cha (see: Dread Necro)
Transmutation: Str (since so many are focused on augmenting force)
Universal: Int (except when mimicking a spell from another school via Wish or whatnot)

I'd make conjuration con based rather then wis based.


I'd say rather then it be by school it should be based on what you specialise in. so a illusionist all there spells would be based of illusion.
and divination should totaly be wisdom based.

I would make generalist wizards have a choice between con and charisma.

[Fitz10019]

Pointless. Most casters go after a 14 con minimum anyways, so they'd just need a +2 item at level 9, +4 at level 13, and +6 at level 16. That's about 2 levels before most people would buy them anyways.

And then there's Druids...

But isn't 'two levels early' relatively expensive, from an available-funds persepective? That would make it at least partially meaninful, as they need to sacrifice by not getting other gear.

An elaboration might be that it has to be a high enough Con without gear. And for druids, a high enough Con in their humanoid form.

Also, can the school by school discussion please find another thread?

[Kesnit]

Pointless. Most casters go after a 14 con minimum anyways, so they'd just need a +2 item at level 9, +4 at level 13, and +6 at level 16. That's about 2 levels before most people would buy them anyways.

Require a base attribute, which I thought was the requirement anyway. (No using items to raise the attribute to the requirement.)

[erikun]

Skill points are based off the "base" INT, but everything else (HP, saves, spells known, DC, spells castable) are based of whatever current ability scores are.

[Milskidasith]

Require a base attribute, which I thought was the requirement anyway. (No using items to raise the attribute to the requirement.)

It's never been based on the base attribute. Making casters require high con and int, though a possible option, only serves to arbitrarily limit the wizard rather than balance things (it basically means that in low point buy, the wizard sucks because they'll be stuck with 4th level spells at best, and in high PB nothing changes.)

[Sstoopidtallkid]

But isn't 'two levels early' relatively expensive, from an available-funds persepective? That would make it at least partially meaninful, as they need to sacrifice by not getting other gear.

Not a whole lot. 4K when you have 45K WBL isn't much at all. You're sacrificing an additional +1 on your Cloak of Resistance or a 2nd level Pearl of Power.

An elaboration might be that it has to be a high enough Con without gear. And for druids, a high enough Con in their humanoid form.

Because we need more confusion about base attributes, enhancement bonuses, and penalties.

[Dante & Vergil]

It's never been based on the base attribute. Making casters require high con and int, though a possible option, only serves to arbitrarily limit the wizard rather than balance things (it basically means that in low point buy, the wizard sucks because they'll be stuck with 4th level spells at best, and in high PB nothing changes.)

Agreed, whole-heartedly. You get fu my friend!
Doing this will aslo weaken the wizard in the long run. You only get +1 to a stat every 4 levels, and spells advance every 2. Can you see the problem with the system as it stands now? You may start out ahead, but sooner or later (depending what system you use to determine stats) you are going to fall behind and won't be able to keep up, and that's with items and inherent boni. In point-buy and/or low-wealth campains the problem only gets worse. Mind you this might not happen until Epic, depending on what you use for stats, so for the sake of this part of the argument, pretend that there was a balanced system in place for Epic Spellcasting and Improved Spell Compacity because some of us already do.) If you want to find one, I know where to find a good one.

[Optimystik]

Just give the higher tiers lower point buy if you want to balance them out that way. Penalizing SADness lumps in a lot of classes that don't deserve it, like Beguiler, Warmage, Binder and Warlock. And fluffwise, making every caster MAD by necessity makes no sense - otherwise you'll force flavorfully frail classes like elves, spellscales, fey etc. to either be buff or inept at magic, when they are neither.

[Snails]

I figure if you can't fix MAD, create balance by changing SAD. I'm thinking of requiring casters to have the same Con requirement as their primary casting ability requirement.

Why is it not possible to fix MAD?

For the Paladin:
* Use Cha as spellcasting stat, instead of Wis
* For a feat, use Cha for melee To Hit bonus instead of Str.

For the Monk:
* Use Wis for melee To Hit bonus instead of Str.
* For a feat, use Wis for melee damage bonus instead of Str.

MAD is easily fixed. It is only a matter of quibbling over the details to get the balance right.

[Myrmex]

Or you could just talk to the players in your group who want to play a full caster, and ask them to tone down their spell selection.

Madness!!!!!

[Demiwraith]

Why is it not possible to fix MAD?

For the Paladin:
* Use Cha as spellcasting stat, instead of Wis
* For a feat, use Cha for melee To Hit bonus instead of Str.

For the Monk:
* Use Wis for melee To Hit bonus instead of Str.
* For a feat, use Wis for melee damage bonus instead of Str.

MAD is easily fixed. It is only a matter of quibbling over the details to get the balance right.

The single attribute thing always bothered me for casters too. But I like the idea of most classes being MAD, so that all attributes are relevant, rather than try and make every class based off of only one or two attributes. Something I've always wanted to try out for all casters:

INT determines extra spells per day.
WIS determines max spell level you can cast.
CHA determines save DCs.

Now you can choose what kind of caster you want to be: Powerful, but unable to control the most potent spells, More but weaker spells per day, etc. In a higher point-buy, wealth, or power-level of your game I might even want to raise the WIS requirements to cast spells of a certain level. (You need 10+(2xSpell_level) to cast level X spells, and 10+Spell_level to even use the X level spell slots for meta-magic enhance lower level spells).

Has anyone ever tried something like this in actual play?

[Milskidasith]

The single attribute thing always bothered me for casters too. But I like the idea of most classes being MAD, so that all attributes are relevant, rather than try and make every class based off of only one or two attributes. Something I've always wanted to try out for all casters:

INT determines extra spells per day.
WIS determines max spell level you can cast.
CHA determines save DCs.

Now you can choose what kind of caster you want to be: Powerful, but unable to control the most potent spells, More but weaker spells per day, etc. In a higher point-buy, wealth, or power-level of your game I might even want to raise the WIS requirements to cast spells of a certain level. (You need 10+(2xSpell_level) to cast level X spells, and 10+Spell_level to even use the X level spell slots for meta-magic enhance lower level spells).

Has anyone ever tried something like this in actual play?

Your fix would trip up newbies and only somewhat limit the options of optimizers. Plus, it requires an absurd wisdom to cast higher level spells; with a 16 starting wisdom, you'll be unable to cast your best spells at level 7 without magic, and at level 17 you'd need a +6 item and a starting 18, or a +6 item, a +2 tome, and a starting 16 just to cast.

Again, all this does is make newbies suck because their spells are all sucky, force even more dependency on spending all your wealth on +stat items instead of stuff that can help the party (wands, scrolls, etc.) and just forces using the already broken routes of no save just die stuff (Orbs, summons, waves of exhaustion, etc.)

[Dante & Vergil]

The single attribute thing always bothered me for casters too. But I like the idea of most classes being MAD, so that all attributes are relevant, rather than try and make every class based off of only one or two attributes. Something I've always wanted to try out for all casters:

INT determines extra spells per day.
WIS determines max spell level you can cast.
CHA determines save DCs.

Now you can choose what kind of caster you want to be: Powerful, but unable to control the most potent spells, More but weaker spells per day, etc. In a higher point-buy, wealth, or power-level of your game I might even want to raise the WIS requirements to cast spells of a certain level. (You need 10+(2xSpell_level) to cast level X spells, and 10+Spell_level to even use the X level spell slots for meta-magic enhance lower level spells).

Has anyone ever tried something like this in actual play?

I can say I have not, as it only serves to severely cripple casters, first by adding a third stat into the mix when you are not getting enough, then by raising the requisite stat requirment to rediculous levels.
If you don't want spellcasters in your game, just don't allow anyone to play one.
Again, I agree with Milskidasith, because he's the only one that thinks that doing this will only create problems.

[Optimystik]

The single attribute thing always bothered me for casters too. But I like the idea of most classes being MAD, so that all attributes are relevant, rather than try and make every class based off of only one or two attributes. Something I've always wanted to try out for all casters:

INT determines extra spells per day.
WIS determines max spell level you can cast.
CHA determines save DCs.

How would that affect casting classes that don't rely on attributes to get spells per day OR max spell level, like Warlocks and Binders?

Madness!!!!!

THIS!
IS!

...too easy