Support the GITP forums on Patreon
Help support GITP's forums (and ongoing server maintenance) via Patreon
Results 1 to 22 of 22
  1. - Top - End - #1
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Deepbluediver's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The US of A

    Default A new system for using magic in D&D 3.5/3.PF (PEACH)

    This is something I've been working on for a while now, and it forms a major part of my attempt to rebalance the 11 core classes so they are closer in terms of versatility and power. The project is ongoing, as I have only posted fixes for 4 classes.

    I don't think my new system is all that complicated, but it is rather extensive; don't spring it on your players/DM 5 minutes before the game.

    The "what" and the "how" of my changes are in this first post, then links to the rewritten spells. The spoilers mostly contain the "why"* for any given change, if I felt it necessary to explain my intent. Thanks for reading!
    *DBD Inc. cannot be held liable for any ensuing madness or loss of sanity due to trying to unwravel the twisted logic of it's writer's brain. You assume full responsibility for any destruction of property or loss of life while under the influence of DBD. By reading this, you have agreed to forfeit your soul for a period of not more than 17 and a half minutes any time DBD requests it, up to and including through the year of 2043. Thank you and have a nice day.

    Special thanks goes out to jiriku, who's comments in his Philiosopher's Stone Magic Fix inspired me to begin thinking about this, and the ever-famous Neoseraphi, who has answered many important questions regarding casting and gameplay. Additional thanks goes out to every forum poster who has suggested their own updates for spells; you may see some of your ideas here.


    Magic
    Magic exists in 3 varieties: Arcane, Elemental, and Divine.
    Arcane spells are cast using power that exists within the caster.
    --Wizards, Sorcerers, and Bards are all arcane casters.
    Elemental magic draws on the ambient magical energy of the environment.
    --Druids and Rangers are elemental magic users.
    Divine spells are granted to mortals by deities and other exceptional beings.
    --Clerics and Paladins cast spells using divine magic.

    Individual spells are not of a particular type; the type of magic used to cast the spell is determined by the caster and how the spell is prepared. The spell Earthquake, for example, can be prepared by sufficiently powerful Wizards, Druids, and Clerics (with the Earth domain). Each caster prepares and casts the spell according to which kind of magic they use. A character with sufficiently powerful magic could prepare the spell three different ways, and cast it 3 separate times as an arcane, elemental, or divine spell.
    Spoiler
    Show
    Elemental magic is a new addition, that I added for variety and minor mechanical differences. (Rather than thinking of the different types of magic as pizza vs ice-cream, think of them as chocolate vs strawberry.) Since elemental magic is drawn from a creatures surroundings but is channeled through them; it is less affected by armor than arcane spells, but not entirely immune to it's effects like divine magic. Most elemental magic users fashion a totem or talisman that strengthens there connection to their environment in some way, acting as a Divine Focus for spellcasting purposes. If they lose their totem and do not have the time or resources to fashion a new one, most elemental magic users are practiced at finding material components that can substitute in a spell for the normal focus or spell components.

    Spellcraft
    Spellcraft is a new stat (no longer a skill) similar to your attack bonus. A player’s Spellcraft bonus is equal to their Base Spellcraft Bonus (BSB), plus their wisdom modifier, plus any bonuses from class features, items, or feats. A player’s BSB progression is usually the inverse of their BAB. Unless stated otherwise, classes with a poor BAB have a BSB equal to their level, classes with an average BAB have an equal BSB, and classes with the best BAB have a BSB equal to one half their level.
    Spellcraft pulls double-duty since it acts like both an attack roll and skillcheck for casting spells. It is opposed by Spell Resistance (SR), which is the magical equivalent of AC.
    Spoiler
    Show
    [Previously magic worked very different from attack rolls and AC in combat. Attack rolls and damage where active, while AC is passive (no roll). Magic was automatically successful (in terms of casting the spell) and defense, if any, was active (saves, etc) unless special spell resistance came into play. This should change both magical attacks and defense to line up more similarly with physical actions (active offensive/action rolls, passive defense/resistance stats).]

    On a side note: it's always bothered me that spells start at level "0" instead of level 1. In my games, spells run from 1-10, and everything is otherwise exactly the same. This doesn't have much effect except that some DCs are slightly higher (in my version of things, this means the spells in question are harder to cast). Feel free to make this switch in your games or not, as you choose; I am leaving everything listed as the level it is in the PHB so as not to cause confusion.


    Casting Checks
    Every time a caster wants to use a spell, they need to make a Spellcraft check to see if they successfully cast it. The DC for casting is equal to 10 + twice the spell’s level + conditional modifiers (if any). If the spell has a target with Spell Resistance (whether it be a person, monster, item, etc) the Spellcraft DC is instead equal to the spell’s level + the target’s SR + conditional modifiers.

    If you attempt a spell and do not pass the casting check, nothing happens. You do not lose the spell slot or prepared spell, but neither does it activate. The only loss is in the time you spent attempting the spell.

    Many spellcasters utilize either a focus or material components to make spellcasting easier. It is possible to cast spells without a focus or spell components but the effective level of a spell for determining the spellcraft roll to cast it is doubled. (the spell does not need to be prepared in a or occupy a higher spell slot, it is just more difficult to succesfully complete)

    Some spells have a continuous effect so long as the caster continues concentrating on the spell. The DC for these checks is equal to one half (rounded down) of the initial check required to cast the spell; see individual spells for details.
    Spoiler
    Show
    [Note: the intention for the concentration checks is that casters should always be able to pass them under good circumstances, such as buffing before a fight; it is only when the situation is dire that it becomes a problem, which I feel only heightens the tension, and is a good thing. The spellcraft checks should succeed about as often as attack rolls.]


    Critical Success and Failure
    Due to the vagaries of magic and the unpredictable nature of ultimate cosmic power, a spell is sometimes more powerful than normal or unexpectedly fails completely.
    For Arcane casters, on a natural roll of 20, the spell is more successful than normal, and the spell is cast successfully, regardless of SR or the actual check needed to cast the spell. For Elemental casters, a spell is automatically successful on a roll of 18, 19, or 20.
    See the description of each spell for the additional effects of an automatic success.
    For Arcane casters, on a roll of 1, the spell automatically fails, regardless of the necessary check. For Elemental casters, a spell automatically fails on a roll of 1 or 2. In general, elemental magic is more powerful but also riskier than arcane magic.

    When a spell fails automatically, roll a d10 to determine the effect of the failure.
    1-6: You flub some small gesture or syllable, and the spell consumes your daily spell slot or prepared spell, but does not cast.
    7-10: Critical spell failure! The spell nearly activates, but at the last moment you make some small mistake, and the spell rushes out in a way you did not expect. See the individual spell description for the effects of a critical failure.

    Divine spellcasters do not have critical successes or failures with their spells, due to the nature of the way they receive and use magical energy. They still need to make casting checks, however; a roll of a 1 or 20 is simply calculated like any other number. This means that spells may will not automatically fail on a 1, but they also might not succeed even on a roll of 20.

    As a magic user grows more powerful and learns how to succesfully manipulate ever-increasing amounts of magical energy, it becomes easier to cast formerly difficult spells. Any spell 2 or more levels below the highest level spell you could cast of that type (arcane, divine, etc) is not subject to critical spell failure. On a roll of 1, you simply lose the spell. Any spell 4 or more levels below the highest level spell of a given type you can cast is not lost on a roll of 1, you simply calculate the spellcraft check normally to see if the spell can be cast or overcomes spell resistance.
    Spoiler
    Show
    For example, a sorcerer with access to 9th level spells would not have to worry about critical spell failure for any spell of 7th level or below. The would not need to worry about wasting the spell slot at all for a spell of 5th level or below, though a roll of 1 is unlikely to overcome a target's SR in any event. If the sorcerer also has 1 level of druid, he still has a chance of failure on his druid spells, because his proficiency with arcane magic does not affect elemental spells.

    Some spells do not have additional effects if you roll a critical success of failure. The spell is still automatically successful on a roll of 20, and still fails on a roll of 1; there are just no other additional bonuses or penalties (other than using up the spell slot if you fail).


    Spell Resistance
    Nearly every person and creature has some innate level of Spell Resistance (SR) that helps them avoid and shrug off the effect of spells. The SR of a creature or person is equal to their base SR, plus their save bonus depending on which school the spell is from, plus any bonuses from class features, items, or other spells.

    Base SR starts at 5, and increase by 1 for every 2 HD the creature posseses. (same as base AC in my sytem)

    • For spells from the Transmutation and Necromany schools, add your Fortitude save bonus to your base SR to determine the resistance you have against a spell.
    • For spells from the schools of Illusion, Enchantment, Divination, and Abjuration add your Will save bonus to your base SR.
    • For Evocation and Conjuration spells, add your Reflex save bonus to base SR.

    If you are unconscious or otherwise totally incapacitated, do not add your saves to your base SR.
    Just for clarification; it is intended that you add your entire save bonus, including feats and ability modifiers, to your base SR.

    Generally, this SR only counts towards spells that specifically target the person, or if the effects of the spell are inherently magical. For example, SR helps repel the effects of both a Charm Person or a Fireball spell, because they target an individual. SR also helps resist the effects of an Entanglement spell because the vines and roots are magical in nature. SR does not help prevent against the effects of an Earthquake spell, because the spell does not target a person, and the effects (shaking, collapsing walls, fissures) are non-magical results of the spell.

    For spells that target an area, compare your SR against the Spellcraft check made when the spell was cast. If the check is higher than your SR, the spell works normally; if the check is lower, you can resist the effects of the spell. Some spells with an extended duration may eventually overcome a creature's Resistance if they spend to long inside the affected area. See individual spells for additional details.
    Spoiler
    Show

    Standard Effects
    Your effective SR against that spell will slowly decrease until the spell can affect you as normal. If the spell was cast in the last 24 hours, your effective SR against that spell decreases by 1 each round. If the spell was cast in the last month (30 day period) your effective SR decrease by 1 each minute. If the spell was cast in the last year your effective SR decrease by 1 each hour. If the spell was cast more than a year ago, your effective SR decreases by 1 every 12 hours.

    Not all Area of Effect spells allow checks against SR. Alarm, for example, triggers automatically, regardless of how high your SR is.

    If you are attempting to cast a spell on yourself, your body and mind ‘recognizes’ your own brand of magic, and automatically reduces your SR against that particular spell to 0, not including any magic items your may be in possession of that grant increases to SR. A friendly target who is aware of what you are doing may reduce their SR against a particular spell to one-half its normal amount as a free action (in effect, choosing not to resist the effects of the magic). This does not include any items the target may be wearing that grant additional SR. This effect can function even if the target is Unconscious or otherwise incapacitated.
    Dead targets do not have SR, though the Undead, being products of magic, may have SR. The same goes for golems and other constructs.

    Non-magical objects generally have no Spell Resistance. Non-magical objects in some one's possession use that creature's SR. Magical items generally have SR of 10+the level of the magic effect on them. If they are in the possession of a creature, they may use their possessor's SR if it is higher.

    If you are unsure of whether or not to use a spell-check or a resistance check when casting, look under the description of each individual spell; there should be a guide to help you determine what DC you need to overcome:
    • Regular- make your spellcraft check against the DC to cast the spell; if you are successful the spell functions normally
    • Target Resistance- make your spell check against the target of the spell’s SR
    • AOE Regular- make a spellcraft check when you cast the spell; when someone enters the area they are immediately subject to the spells affects
    • AOE Resistance- make a spellcraft check when you cast the spell; when someone enters the area compare their SR to that check to see if they are affected by the spell | For spells with an Instantaneous duration, make a regular spellcraft check to cast the spell, then compare that to each person in the targeted area individually.

    Spoiler
    Show
    [Note: I realized after I started working through this that when players fail to overcome SR, I was treating the spell the same as if they had failed a non-target spellcraft check. What happens to the spell in this case? With the rules I laid out, its as if the spell never cast, which made sense for things like Earthquake, but less so for Fireball or Ray of Frost.
    My intent was that SR allows players to shrug off magic effects, but under my own rules, a wizard might “cast” fireballs all day and never actually get one to hit a player. After thinking for a while, I decided that there was no easy solution that didn’t involve adding more checks and complicating the process further, but I didn’t have a problem with this.

    Rather than thinking of it as “the player dodges or simply ignores the effects of magical fire”, the spell is like a guided missile, and the target's SR is making it difficult for the caster to get a ‘lock’ on them, and so he can’t cast the spell. Only if he manages to overcome the SR can his spells hit the target. After thinking some more, I decided I actually liked this better, since I was having trouble wrapping my brain around how a magical fireball might NOT cause someone damage without involving counter-magic. In addition, this adds a little longevity to blaster-type casters, since they don’t (usually) have to worry about wasting spells on targets with high SR.]


    Caster Level
    I’ve always disliked that caster level could somehow be different from character level. If you see anything that reads “caster’s level” or “/level” just assume it means the same as ECL. I’m convinced I can do everything I want to with ECL, and Spellcraft checks. I am emliminating spell-level and the Heighten spell feat; spells will scale automatically and any need for an opposing check against a spell can be done via spellcraft.
    If you can explain to me why your Fighter 19/Wizard 1 or other Gish-combo that can make a few more gallons of water is game breaking, I’ll reconsider my stance.

    Bonus Spells
    Bonus spells are now always determined by Intellect.
    You only recieve bonus spells if you would normally recieve spells of that level from your class.
    Spoiler
    Show
    [Ok, I’m sure this is gonna cause some unholy ruckus, so lemme explain before you break out the pitchforks and torches. It took a long while to settle on what I wanted to do here, so please be assured that this is not a decision I am making on a whim. Basically, I feel that if the only difference between two classes of casters is their primary casting attribute, then that is a failure of the RAW. I fully intend to see that both wizards and sorcerers feel completely different by the time I am done (at the very least, as different as one melee class feels from another).
    Just as Strength/Constitution forms the backbone of melee classes, I want Intellect and Wisdom to be the caster-combo. Casters who end up with Intellect/Charisma will be like Dexterity builds; they have a different focus and flavor, but can accomplish much the same thing.

    I am planning on adjusting the base level of spells that most casters get, particularly hybrids (like druids), and increasing the amount they get as bonus spells. The end result will be that primary casters will end up at about the same spot, but hopefully with their SAD somewhat reduced. The other important change is that hybrid classes will not be the same as primary casters UNLESS they invest in a spellcaster build, at the expense of their melee stats. Non-primary casters (paladins, rangers, maybe bards, etc) will either stay the same, or get their base spells increased slightly so that they do not need to add Intellect to their already extensive MAD. These classes generally have less powerful and less varied spells, so even if someone stacked intellect and wisdom on their paladin, I am unconcerned that it would be game breaking.]

    Bonus Spells by Level
    {table=head] Score |Modifier|0 |1st|2nd|3rd|4th|5th|6th|7th|8th|9th

    1|-5|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--

    2-3|-4|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--

    4-5|-3|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--

    6-7|-2|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--

    8-9|-1|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--

    10-11|0|1|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--

    12-13|+1|2|1|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--

    14-15|+2|2|2|1|--|--|--|--|--|--|--

    16-17|+3|3|2|2|1|--|--|--|--|--|--

    18-19|+4|3|3|2|2|1|--|--|--|--|--

    20-21|+5|3|3|3|2|2|1|--|--|--|--

    22-23|+6|4|3|3|3|2|2|1|--|--|--

    24-25|+7|4|4|3|3|3|2|2|1|--|--

    26-27|+8|4|4|4|3|3|3|2|2|1|--

    28-29|+9|4|4|4|4|3|3|3|2|2|1

    30-31|+10|5|4|4|4|4|3|3|3|2|2

    32-33|+11|5|5|4|4|4|4|3|3|3|2

    34-35|+12|5|5|5|4|4|4|4|3|3|3

    36-37|+13|5|5|5|5|4|4|4|4|3|3

    38-39|+14|5|5|5|5|5|4|4|4|4|3

    40-41|+15|6|5|5|5|5|5|4|4|4|4

    42-43|+16|6|6|5|5|5|5|5|4|4|4

    44-45|+17|6|6|6|5|5|5|5|5|4|4

    etc...|...|...|...|...|...|...|...|...|...|...|...[/table]

    Range
    The range for spells has been decreased somewhat.
    Long – 100 ft + 10 ft/level
    Medium – 50 ft + 5 ft/level
    Short – 25 ft + 5/ft 2 levels
    Touch – within Reach
    Spoiler
    Show
    Formerly high level spellcasters could hurl spells nearly a quarter mile, well outside the effective range of all but the best archers. Even short and medium range spells easily outdistanced what most non-primary spellcasters could handle. Combat rarely took place at those distances, but it was just one more thing that could lead to abuse and imbalance.

    The range of a touch spell is most accurately represented as "less than 1 foot". This means you do not actually need to succeed on a touch attack to deliver a touch spell, you merely need to be within reach.


    Metamagic
    Metamagic reducers do not stack; only the largest reduction applies to the total adjustment for any single spell. Metamagic reducers cannot reduce a spells level slot below +0.
    Spoiler
    Show
    I intend to tweak some of the most egregious ways to abuse metamagic, mainly Arcane Thesis and DMM. I’ll probably leave most of the metamagic feats where they are, unless someone brings a specific case to my attention.

    If you think some metamagic feats are overly inhibitive and choose to alter the enhancement cost (spell slot level increase) I recommend you work within the following philosophy: Any metamagic feat that has a purely positive benefit should have a minimum increase of +1. If you want a metamagic feat to have a level change of +0, there should be an equal possibility of loss or ineffectiveness.
    For example, if you wanted to align your spells with lawful (axiomatic) energy to be more effective and deal extra damage to chaotic creatures, then it should have a spell slot increase of at least +1. This is a fairly specific effect, but the cost should only be +0 if the feat also made your spells less effective and dealt less damage to lawful creatures.


    Counterspelling
    The counterspelling mechanic has been removed and replaced with an actuall spell called "counterspell". It is my hope that I can make this more usefull without it being overpowering.

    Spell Books
    For casters who use spellbooks to prepare their daily use of magic, they not only record the exact incantations and gestures of a spell, but also any notes on their research or experience devoted to learning the spell, as well as records of it's use and possibly even anecdotes about its effectiveness or lack thereof. This is why several pages of a spellbook may be devoted to a single spell that is ostensibly only one word long.
    0 level spells take up 1 page
    1st-6th level spells take up 2 pages
    7th-9th level spells take up 4 pages
    10th+ level spells take up 8 pages

    Spellbooks are generally available in 3 sizes:
    Standard spellbooks are 12 inches tall, 9 inches wide, and 2.5 inches deep (approx. 30x23x6 cm), weigh 5 lbs., and cost about 15gp. (many wealthy wizards prefer more lavishly decorated tomes, which of course are more expensive) They can hold up to 150 pages worth of spells.
    Travel-sized spellbooks (also know as "Apprentice spellbooks") are 7"x5"x1", weigh 1.5 lbs., and cost about 10 gp. They can hold up to 40 pages worth of spells.
    Reference spellbooks are 18"x12"x4", weigh 18 lbs., and cost about 300 gp. They can hold up to 500 pages worth of spells, although most creatures do not try to carry such an unwieldly, expensive, and fragile piece of equipment into dangerous situations.

    Spell-Like Abilities
    Unless the individual ability describes otherwise, Spell-like abilities take 1 Standard action to use and are treated as if they where always succesful (as if you had rolled a natural 20), however they cannot achieve the critical effect of a spell. For purposes of overcoming spell resistance, the spellcraft check of a spell-like ability is considered to be equal to 10+the caster's ECL or CR+Wisdom.
    For non-standard SLAs, see the individual description for details.

    Supernatural Abilities
    Supernatural abilities are inherently different from other magic. Unless the individual ability describes otherwise, Supernatural abilities require a Full-round action to use. For the purpose of overcoming spell resistance, the spellcraft check of a supernatural ability is considered to be equal to 20+the caster's ECL or CR+Charisma.


    Feats have been moved here to reduce clutter.
    Last edited by Deepbluediver; 2013-01-28 at 12:02 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rater202 View Post
    It's not called common because the sense is common, it's called common because it's about common things.
    Homebrew Extended Signature!

  2. - Top - End - #2
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Deepbluediver's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The US of A

    Default Re: A new system of magic for D&D 3.5/3.PF (PEACH)

    The sheer volume of text of all the spells was starting to clutter up the thread, and I'm not even a quarter done. Therefore, at the suggestion of a couple of other forum-goers, I am moving the spell descriptions offsight. If you are having trouble viewing them, please send me a message and I'll fiddle with the settings.
    Thanks!


    Spells A-L

    View all A spells here
    Completed: Acid Splash, Air Walk, Alarm, Alter, Animal Messenger, Animal Trance, Antiplant Shell, Arcane Mark

    View all B spells here
    Completed: Bane, Baleful Polymorph, Barkskin, Bear's Endurance, Bestow Curse, Bless, Bless Weapon, Blight, Break Enchantment, Bull's Strength

    View all C spells here
    Completed: Call Lightning, Calm Animals, Chain Lighting, Charm Animal, Charm Person, Chill Metal, Command Plant, Comprehend Languages, Contagion, Control Water, Counterspell, Cure Wounds (all), Curse Weapon

    View all D spells here
    Completed: Dancing Lights, Daylight, Delay Poison, Detect Aura, Detect Animals & Plants, Detect Poison, Diminish Plants, Disjunction, Dispell Magic, Disrupt Undead, Divine Power, Dominate Animal, Dragonshape

    View all E spells here
    Completed: Earthquake, Endure Elements, Entangle

    View all F spells here
    Completed: Faerie Fire, Fireball, Fire Trap, Flame Blade, Flame Strike, Flaming Sphere, Flare, Fog Cloud, Freedom of Movement

    View all G spells here
    Completed: Genesis, Ghost Sound, Giant Vermin, Goodberry, Guidance, Gust of Wind

    View all H spells here
    Completed: Harm, Heal, Heat Metal, Hide from Animals, Hold Animal, Hold Person

    View all I spells here
    Completed: Ice Storm, Implosion

    View all J spells here
    Completed: Jump

    View all K spells here
    Completed: Keen Edge, Knock, Know Direction

    View all L spells here
    Completed: Light, Lightning Bolt, Longstrider

    Notes:
    • Arcane Mark has been added to the Bard spell list
    • Command Plants is now an Enchantment spell
    • Counterspell is now added to the Sor/Wiz, Cleric, Bard, and Druid spell lists as an Abjuration spell
    • the Cure Wounds spells are now necromancy(healing) spells
    • Dancing lights is now an Illusion spell
    • Disrupt Undead has been added to the Cleric spell list
    • Genesis has been added to the druid spell list; feel free to also add it any spellcaster with a full list (9+ spell levels) where you can reasonably justify it.
    • Keen Edge has been added to the Paladin and Ranger spell lists



    spell name
    school
    Level:
    Components:
    Casting Time:
    Range:
    Target:
    Area:
    Duration:
    Spellcraft:
    Last edited by Deepbluediver; 2012-09-22 at 10:25 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rater202 View Post
    It's not called common because the sense is common, it's called common because it's about common things.
    Homebrew Extended Signature!

  3. - Top - End - #3
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Deepbluediver's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The US of A

    Default Re: A new system of magic for D&D 3.5/3.PF (PEACH)

    Spells M-Z

    View all M spells here
    Completed: Mage Armor, Mage Hand, Magic Fang, Magic Missile, Magic Stone, Meld into Stone, Mending, Message, Meteor Storm, Mind Blank

    View all N spells here
    Completed: Neutralize Poison

    View all O spells here
    Completed: Obscuring Mist, Owl's Wisdom

    View all P spells here
    Completed: Pass without Trace, Permanency, Phantasmal Killer, Plant Growth, Poison, Polar Ray, Prestidigitation, Produce Flame, Protection from Energy

    View all Q spells here
    Completed: Quench

    View all R spells here
    Completed: Ray of Frost, Read Magic, Reduce Animal, Reincarnate, Remove Curse, Remove Disease, Repel Vermin, Resilient Sphere, Resist Energy, Resistance, Restoration (all), Righteous Might, Rusting Grasp

    View all S spells here
    Completed: Scrying, Shillelagh, Sleet Storm, Snare, Speak with Animals, Speak with Plants, Spider Climb, Spike Growth, Spike Stones, Soften Earth & Stone, Stone Shape, Summon Nature's Ally, Summon Swarm

    View all T spells here
    Completed: Time Stop, Touch of Fatigue, Tree Shape

    View all U spells here

    View all V spells here
    Completed: Virtue

    View all W spells here
    Completed: Wall of Fire, Warp Wood, Water Breathing, Wind Wall, Wood Shape

    View all Z spells here


    Notes
    • Mage armor is now an abjuration spell
    • Reincarnate has been bumped up to a 5th level spell for druids
    • Remove disease and the Restoration spells have been switched to the necromancy(healing) school
    • Righteous Might has been bumped up to level 6, it is still available at level 5 for characters with the Strength domain
    Last edited by Deepbluediver; 2012-10-07 at 05:04 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rater202 View Post
    It's not called common because the sense is common, it's called common because it's about common things.
    Homebrew Extended Signature!

  4. - Top - End - #4
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Deepbluediver's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The US of A

    Default Re: A new system for using magic in D&D 3.5/3.PF (PEACH)

    Feats
    Charismatic Casting [General] (new feat)
    Prerequisite: the ability to cast arcane, divine, or elemental spells
    Benefit: You may add your Charisma modifier to your Spellcraft bonus, in addition to your other bonuses or penalties from other sources, including Wisdom.
    Spoiler
    Show
    I went back and forth on how exactly this should work; there are situations where it favorable to add the two stats together, and situations where replacing one would be preferable. For now I think I will leave the feat as adding them together, and for any class that needs charisma (like the paladin) I will rewrite a class feature that replaces one with the other.

    Critical Casting [General] (new feat)
    Prerequisite: the ability to cast arcane, divine, or elemental spells
    Benefit: You increase the range of your spell’s chance to critically succeed by 2, and the range of your spell’s chance to critically fail by 1.

    Spell Focus [General]
    Choose a School of Magic
    Benefit: You gain a +1 bonus to your Spellcraft checks whenever casting spells from your chosen school.
    Special: You can gain this feat multiple times; its effects do not stack. Each time you take this feat you select another school to gain the bonus.

    Improved Spell Focus [General]
    Choose a School of Magic to which you have already applied the Spell Focus Feat.
    Benefit: You gain a +1 bonus to your Spellcraft checks whenever casting spells from your chosen school. This bonus stacks with the bonus from Spell Focus.
    Special: You can gain this feat multiple times. Its effects do not stack. Each time you take the feat, it applies to a new school of magic to which you already have applied the Spell Focus feat.

    Greater Spell Focus [General]
    Choose a School of Magic to which you have already applied the Improved Spell Focus Feat.
    Benefit: You gain a +2 bonus to your Spellcraft checks whenever casting spells from your chosen school. This bonus stacks with the bonus from Spell Focus and Improved Spell Focus.
    Special: You can gain this feat multiple times. Its effects do not stack. Each time you take the feat, it applies to a new school of magic to which you already have applied the Improved Spell Focus feat.

    Spell Penetration [General]
    Benefit: You gain a +2 bonus to your Spellcraft roll when casting a spell that needs to overcome spell resistance. This bonus stacks with any other bonuses that increase your spellcraft check, inlcuding those from feats such as Spell Focus

    Greater Spell Penetration [General]
    Prerequisite: Spell Penetration
    Benefit: You gain a +3 bonus to your Spellcraft roll when casting a spell that needs to overcome spell resistance. This bonus stacks with the one from Spell Penetration.

    Arcane Thesis [General]
    You have studied a small group of spells in depth. Your expertise grants formidable, though narrowly focused, arcane mastery.
    Prerequisite: Knowledge (aracana) 9 ranks, ability to cast arcane spells
    Benefit: Choose one level of spells from any one school to be your arcane thesis spells. When casting those spells, you gain a +2 to Spellcraft checks. When you apply metamagic feats to these spells, the enhanced spell uses up a spell slot one level lower than normal for the total (sum) of the metamagic modification.
    Retraining: At any time you would gain a new spell level, you may pick a different set of spell to apply Arcane Thesis to.

    Divine Metamagic [Divine]
    You can channel energy into some of your divine spells to make them more powerful.
    Prerequisite: Ability to channel energy for healing or dealing damage like a cleric*
    Benefit: When you attempt to cast a divine spell, you can take the positive or negative energy you would normally channel and use it to decrease the cost of applying a metamagic feat to that spell. You may spend one daily use of channeled energy to reduce the level increase for a metamagic feat by 1. For example, Jozan the cleric could sacrifice one use of channeled energy to reduce necessary spell slot for his empowered Holy Smite from 6 (4+2) to 5 (4+1).

    You may not use this to reduce more than 1 metamagic feat applied to a any single spell. If you are required to prepare your spells ahead of time, then you must choose to apply both the metamagic feat and this effect at that time. Once you have done so, you loose one daily use of channeled energy immediately, regardless of whether or not you eventually cast the spell.
    *I prefer the pathfinder version of channeling energy rather than rebuking/bolstering undead. Feel free to change this back if you don’t use it.

    Magic Resistance [General] (new feat)
    Benefit: You gain a +1 bonus to your spell resistance. This Bonus increase by 1 for every 5 HD you have (so for a PC it becomes +2 at level 5, +3 at level 10, etc).

    Improved Magic Resistance [General] (new feat)
    Choose a school of magic
    Prerequisites: Magic Resistance
    Benefit: You gain a +2 bonus to your spell resistance against spells from the chosen school. This bonus increase by +1 for every 5 HD you have, and stacks with spell resistance from the Magic Resistance feat.
    Special: You may select this feat multiple times; it's effects do not stack. Each time you take this feat you must select a new school of magic from which to apply it's effect.

    Heighten Spell [Metamagic] RE-REMOVED
    Spoiler
    Show
    Decided I wanted to go in a different direction after all.

    Basically, I want to make a lot more high-level spells Full-Round actions of longer. Part of the problem is that they are standard actions, even though they do much more than a melee character could do with the same standard actions.
    Basically, no 0-level spells should take a Full Round, while ALL 9th-level spells should. Everything else will be somewhere in between.



    Obviously, rewriting every spell ever written is gonna take me some time, but I'll keep at it. For now I'm focusing on anything I can find on the SRD, then I will move on to the PHBII.
    I've tried to start with some of the classic game-breakers, followed by as wide a selection of different spell types as possible to show what I'm working towards.

    If you want to use my system in a game, send me a private message with what spells you need (the more specific the better) and I'll bump them to the top of my priority list.
    Last edited by Deepbluediver; 2012-10-07 at 05:09 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rater202 View Post
    It's not called common because the sense is common, it's called common because it's about common things.
    Homebrew Extended Signature!

  5. - Top - End - #5
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2009

    Default Re: A new system for using magic in D&D 3.5/3.PF (PEACH)

    When you say the casting check is equal to 10+2XSL+modifiers, I presume that means the DC? (You probably should be explicit).

    Why is Necromancy SR based on Reflex? Fortitude makes far more sense.

  6. - Top - End - #6
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Deepbluediver's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The US of A

    Default Re: A new system for using magic in D&D 3.5/3.PF (PEACH)

    Quote Originally Posted by Yitzi View Post
    When you say the casting check is equal to 10+2XSL+modifiers, I presume that means the DC? (You probably should be explicit).

    Why is Necromancy SR based on Reflex? Fortitude makes far more sense.
    Yeah, it's like the check for Attack rolls; I'll make a note.
    The "other modifiers" where supposed to be things like casting a spell during an intense storm; things that formerly forced a concentration check. I don't expect them to really come into play that often.


    The SR choice for necromancy was basically what I had room for when I finished assigning the rest; I wanted to keep them evenly spread out. If I swap Necro into Fort, what can I put back into Reflex? I'm thinking abjuration, and maybe conjuration too. I don't think that either one are gonna have a ton of spells that actually check against SR.
    Last edited by Deepbluediver; 2012-01-17 at 10:54 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rater202 View Post
    It's not called common because the sense is common, it's called common because it's about common things.
    Homebrew Extended Signature!

  7. - Top - End - #7
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2009

    Default Re: A new system for using magic in D&D 3.5/3.PF (PEACH)

    Quote Originally Posted by Deepbluediver View Post
    Yeah, it's like the check for Attack rolls; I'll make a note.
    The "other modifiers" where supposed to be things like casting a spell during an intense storm; things that formerly forced a concentration check. I don't expect them to really come into play that often.


    The SR choice for necromancy was basically what I had room for when I finished assigning the rest; I wanted to keep them evenly spread out. If I swap Necro into Fort, what can I put back into Reflex? I'm thinking abjuration, and maybe conjuration too. I don't think that either one are gonna have a ton of spells that actually check against SR.
    I'd say follow the tendencies for saves against that school, so Conjuration and Evocation are reflex, Necromancy and Transmutation are Fort, and Abjuration, Divination, Enchantment, and Illusion are Will. You do get more schools for Will than the others, but those (with the exception of Enchantment) tend to be the ones you're least likely to target an enemy with.

  8. - Top - End - #8
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Deepbluediver's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The US of A

    Default Re: A new system for using magic in D&D 3.5/3.PF (PEACH)

    Quote Originally Posted by Yitzi View Post
    I'd say follow the tendencies for saves against that school, so Conjuration and Evocation are reflex, Necromancy and Transmutation are Fort, and Abjuration, Divination, Enchantment, and Illusion are Will. You do get more schools for Will than the others, but those (with the exception of Enchantment) tend to be the ones you're least likely to target an enemy with.
    Ok, I'll switch it up to what you suggested for now, but I'm reserving the right to go back and edit it again after I finish some more spells.

    It's not just blasters anymore that need to worry about SR; I'm basically baking former saves into the base Resistance for everything, so even some illusions and divinations are likely to end making checks against your target's SR. Also, I was hoping I could use a few spells (likely conjuration) that can bypass SR at the cost of making a second (attack) roll. That way casters won't be inneffective against some one stacking SR.


    Edit: I am learning that there are so many more spells than I ever realized. I mean objectively I knew there was a lot, but I rarely played arcane casters and most people I knew seemed to all use the same 30-40 for just about everything. I keep finding myself saying "I have never heard of this before" but then I actually go dig out my hardcopy of the PHB and THERE THEY ARE.

    Did you realize there are over 100 pages of spell descriptions in the PHB alone?
    Does anyone know if there's a limit on the amount of text I'm allowed to post?
    Last edited by Deepbluediver; 2012-01-17 at 09:21 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rater202 View Post
    It's not called common because the sense is common, it's called common because it's about common things.
    Homebrew Extended Signature!

  9. - Top - End - #9
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2009

    Default Re: A new system for using magic in D&D 3.5/3.PF (PEACH)

    Quote Originally Posted by Deepbluediver View Post
    It's not just blasters anymore that need to worry about SR
    Was it ever? The general rule was, and remains, that if your spells directly target the enemy you have to worry about SR, and if they don't then you don't. The only difference is that now you can't use SR: No spells to get around it, but that affects Conjuration, not Divination and not so much Illusion.

  10. - Top - End - #10
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Deepbluediver's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The US of A

    Default Re: A new system for using magic in D&D 3.5/3.PF (PEACH)

    Quote Originally Posted by Yitzi View Post
    Was it ever? The general rule was, and remains, that if your spells directly target the enemy you have to worry about SR, and if they don't then you don't. The only difference is that now you can't use SR: No spells to get around it, but that affects Conjuration, not Divination and not so much Illusion.
    It's being applied a little more broadly, I think. I know there are a few save-or die spells that are going to need their text changed; phantasmal killer is the only one I've tried so far.

    The other thing that I've been thinking about it a mechanic to limit spamming the same spell repeatedly, but I don't know if that will be to much on top of what I've already done.
    Last edited by Deepbluediver; 2012-01-17 at 09:40 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rater202 View Post
    It's not called common because the sense is common, it's called common because it's about common things.
    Homebrew Extended Signature!

  11. - Top - End - #11
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    lost in my own mind

    Default Re: A new system for using magic in D&D 3.5/3.PF (PEACH)

    Quote Originally Posted by Deepbluediver View Post
    Does anyone know if there's a limit on the amount of text I'm allowed to post?
    There's a hard limit of I think 50,000 characters a post, which doesn't sound like much, but I've gotten 6 whole base classes (albeit T6 classes) in one post before, so you should be good for a while.

  12. - Top - End - #12
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Deepbluediver's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The US of A

    Default Re: A new system for using magic in D&D 3.5/3.PF (PEACH)

    Quote Originally Posted by Noctis Vigil View Post
    There's a hard limit of I think 50,000 characters a post, which doesn't sound like much, but I've gotten 6 whole base classes (albeit T6 classes) in one post before, so you should be good for a while.
    The limit is 50,000, and I'm starting to bump up against it for some of my posts, so I'm adding a few more spaces to spread stuff out. Hopefully by doing this early saturday morning it won't get in people's way.

    If anyone knows a better way to post large amounts of text online, and I can just provide links or something, please let me know. I don't want to unneccesarily clutter up the site with my personal project.
    Last edited by Deepbluediver; 2012-03-02 at 01:07 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rater202 View Post
    It's not called common because the sense is common, it's called common because it's about common things.
    Homebrew Extended Signature!

  13. - Top - End - #13
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Maquise's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    St. Louis

    Default Re: A new system for using magic in D&D 3.5/3.PF (PEACH)

    You could make a Google Doc.
    "For it is in passing that we achieve immortality" - Pyrrha Nikos

    Quote Originally Posted by Stu42 View Post
    I used to like called shots. Then I took an arrow to the knee.
    Arvak Avatar by Dirtytabs

  14. - Top - End - #14
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Deepbluediver's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The US of A

    Default Re: A new system for using magic in D&D 3.5/3.PF (PEACH)

    Quote Originally Posted by Maquise View Post
    You could make a Google Doc.
    Yes, another Forum user sent me a message mentioning them as well; I'm working to transfer everything over, and then I'll clean this up and delete some of these extra posts.

    I learned about something new today!
    Last edited by Deepbluediver; 2012-03-02 at 01:08 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rater202 View Post
    It's not called common because the sense is common, it's called common because it's about common things.
    Homebrew Extended Signature!

  15. - Top - End - #15
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Ernir's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Iceland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: A new system for using magic in D&D 3.5/3.PF (PEACH)

    I like the unifying premise of the basic mechanics you have set out here.

    I am not sold on the critical failures, though. Those aren't considered a very good idea for mundane attackers, what makes them a good idea for casters? =/
    Quote Originally Posted by Deepbluediver View Post
    If anyone knows a better way to post large amounts of text online, and I can just provide links or something, please let me know. I don't want to unneccesarily clutter up the site with my personal project.
    What I have done is to compile and link a PDF, makes cross-referencing much easier. My spellcasting overhaul is a 300+ page behemoth of one.

    I don't doubt that this reduces the visibility of the material, though. Adding extra clicks to someone's browsing experience is a really good way to make sure that material isn't read. =/
    Halfling healer avatar by Akrim.elf.

    My sarcasm is never blue.

    Personal stuff: The Diablo 2 game (DMing), BBCode syntax highlighter for KDE
    CharOp: Lists of Necessary Magic Items
    Homebrew: My proudest achievement, a translation of vancian spellcasting to psionic mechanics. Other brew can be found in my Homebrewer's Extended Signature.

  16. - Top - End - #16
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Deepbluediver's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The US of A

    Default Re: A new system for using magic in D&D 3.5/3.PF (PEACH)

    Quote Originally Posted by Ernir View Post
    I like the unifying premise of the basic mechanics you have set out here.

    I am not sold on the critical failures, though. Those aren't considered a very good idea for mundane attackers, what makes them a good idea for casters? =/
    I like the idea of critical failures, because I feel that they add extra tension and excitement to the game. They don't happen that often ~approx. 2% of the time for arcane casters, 4% for elemental, and not at all for divine casters, but just they fact that the are a possibility is swimming around in the back of a players mind.
    But if you don't like them then don't use them. Anyone can use any piece or version of my homebrew that they like, and I won't get offended. If you're playing a game without fumbles or other failures, just remove critical failure and have the spell be lost on a roll of 1.

    All that being said, I'm actually having a lot of fun writing the critical failures. Critical success just tends to be more, bigger, longer, etc, (wow that sounded kind of dirty...) but what exactly is the opposite of "gaining spider-like characteristics" or "strike down your enemies with lightning"?

    Edit: something else I thought of- why don't you think they're a great idea for melee? Is it because they add one more penalty on top of everything else that melee don't need? That was part of the "magic is always successful" issue I mentioned earlier. But if both melee and magic users are more equal anyway, they become less of a anchor around one groups neck.


    What I have done is to compile and link a PDF, makes cross-referencing much easier. My spellcasting overhaul is a 300+ page behemoth of one.

    I don't doubt that this reduces the visibility of the material, though. Adding extra clicks to someone's browsing experience is a really good way to make sure that material isn't read. =/
    Since this rewrite is still ongoing, I think a link offsight is the best I can do for now. At the very worst just ctrl+f to search for a particular spell.

    Also, I'd love to read your verion, I'm always looking for new ideas to steal inspiriation and I've never played a campaign with psionics, but I can't seem to download the PDF. I've tried clicking, right-clicking and open in a new tab, save target as, but it doesn't seem to be working. Is there something special I need to do?
    Last edited by Deepbluediver; 2012-07-08 at 10:21 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rater202 View Post
    It's not called common because the sense is common, it's called common because it's about common things.
    Homebrew Extended Signature!

  17. - Top - End - #17
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Ernir's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Iceland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: A new system for using magic in D&D 3.5/3.PF (PEACH)

    Quote Originally Posted by Deepbluediver View Post
    If you're playing a game without fumbles or other failures, just remove critical failure and have the spell be lost on a roll of 1.
    That's what I'd be inclined to do.
    Quote Originally Posted by Deepbluediver View Post
    Edit: something else I thought of- why don't you think they're a great idea for melee? Is it because they add one more penalty on top of everything else that melee don't need? That was part of the "magic is always successful" issue I mentioned earlier. But if both melee and magic users are more equal anyway, they become less of a anchor around one groups neck.
    1. They are flat screwup chances, that don't get any better as the levels pile on. Grog the Strong, level 1 goblin hunter, he can fail embarrassingly one out of every 20 times. But when Grog the Strong, level 20 ruler of three Barbarian Kingdoms drops his axe in mid-combat, that's just... weird.
    2. The chance actually gets worse as you level, due to more actions being performed. If you perform two d20 rolls per round, there's an approximately 10% chance of a 1 coming up. With 3 rolls, it's about 14%, with 4 rolls about 19%, and with 5 rolls 23%. And those are just the basic 4 iteratives + haste attack that any high level character is going to perform. If you're a Rogue with 10+ attacks, you have to be pretty lucky just to get through a full attack without Bad Stuff happening. Casters don't get this as badly, but still, they'll feel it.
    3. Increased randomness always hurts the players.

    That's basically it, I think.
    Quote Originally Posted by Deepbluediver View Post
    Also, I'd love to read your verion, I'm always looking for new ideas to steal inspiriation and I've never played a campaign with psionics, but I can't seem to download the PDF. I've tried clicking, right-clicking and open in a new tab, save target as, but it doesn't seem to be working. Is there something special I need to do?
    Weird, because all of the methods you mentioned work here. And you're the first I've heard having problems.

    And no, you shouldn't have to do anything special, apart from having a PDF reader.
    Could a browser extension or some other overeager security feature be blocking the download?

    The latest release and the working version are on different hosts. If neither works, I'd say it's very likely that the problem is somewhere on your end. Is the browser up to date?
    Last edited by Ernir; 2012-02-20 at 11:37 PM.
    Halfling healer avatar by Akrim.elf.

    My sarcasm is never blue.

    Personal stuff: The Diablo 2 game (DMing), BBCode syntax highlighter for KDE
    CharOp: Lists of Necessary Magic Items
    Homebrew: My proudest achievement, a translation of vancian spellcasting to psionic mechanics. Other brew can be found in my Homebrewer's Extended Signature.

  18. - Top - End - #18
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Drolyt's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: A new system for using magic in D&D 3.5/3.PF (PEACH)

    Quote Originally Posted by Deepbluediver View Post
    This is something I've been working on for a while now, and it forms a major part of my attempt to rebalance the 11 core classes so they are closer in terms of versatility and power. The project is ongoing, as I have only posted fixes for 4 classes.

    I don't think my new system is all that complicated, but it is rather extensive; don't spring it on your players/DM 5 minutes before the game.

    The "what" and the "how" of my changes are in this first post, then links to the rewritten spells. The spoilers mostly contain the "why"* for any given change, if I felt it necessary to explain my intent. Thanks for reading!
    *DBD Inc. cannot be held liable for any ensuing madness or loss of sanity due to trying to unwravel the insane logic it's writer's brain. You assume full responsibility for any destruction of property or loss of life while under the influence of DBD. By reading this, you have agreed to forfeit your soul for a period of not more than 17 and a half minutes any time DBD requests it, up to and including through the year of 2043. Thank you and have a nice day.

    Special thanks goes out to jiriku, who's comments in his Philiosopher's Stone Magic Fix inspired me to begin thinking about this, and the ever-famous Neoseraphi, who has answered many important questions regarding casting and gameplay. Additional thanks goes out to every forum poster who has suggested their own updates for spells; you may see some of your ideas here.
    Sounds interesting. I'll help if I can.
    Magic
    Magic exists in 3 varieties: Arcane, Elemental, and Divine.
    Arcane spells are cast using power that exists within the caster.
    --Wizards, Sorcerers, and Bards are all arcane casters.
    Elemental magic draws on the ambient magical energy of the environment.
    --Druids and Rangers are elemental magic users.
    Divine spells are granted to mortals by deities and other exceptional beings.
    --Clerics and Paladins cast spells using divine magic.

    Individual spells are not of a particular type; the type of magic used to cast the spell is determined by the caster and how the spell is prepared. The spell Earthquake, for example, can be prepared by sufficiently powerful Wizards, Druids, and Clerics (with the Earth domain). Each caster prepares and casts the spell according to which kind of magic they use. A character with sufficiently powerful magic could prepare the spell three different ways, and cast it 3 separate times as an arcane, elemental, or divine spell.
    Sounds fine. I'm not positive why there needs to be three (or two or nine) types of magic, but there's nothing wrong with it.
    Spellcraft
    Spellcraft is a new stat (no longer a skill) similar to your attack bonus. A player’s Spellcraft bonus is equal to their Base Spellcraft Bonus (BSB), plus their wisdom modifier, plus any bonuses from class features, items, or feats. A player’s BSB is the inverse of their BAB. Classes with a poor BAB have a BSB equal to their level. Classes with an average BAB have an equal BSB. Classes with the best BAB have a BSB equal to one half their level.
    Spellcraft pulls double-duty since it acts like both an attack roll and skillcheck for casting spells. It is opposed by Spell Resistance (SR), which is the magical equivalent of AC.
    Spoiler
    Show
    [Previously magic worked very different from attack rolls and AC in combat. Attack rolls and damage where active, while AC is passive (no roll). Magic was automatically successful (in terms of casting the spell) and defense, if any, was active (saves, etc) unless special spell resistance came into play. This should change both magical attacks and defense to line up more similarly with physical actions (active offensive/action rolls, passive defense/resistance stats).]
    I like this. I always thought it odd (and probably bad game design) that magical attacks functions so differently from normal attacks.
    Casting Checks
    Every time a caster wants to use a spell, they need to make a Spellcraft check to see if they successfully cast it. The DC for casting is equal to 10 + twice the spell’s level + conditional modifiers (if any). If the spell has a target with Spell Resistance (whether it be a person, monster, item, etc) the Spellcraft DC is instead equal to the spell’s level + the target’s SR + conditional modifiers.

    If you attempt a spell and do not pass the casting check, nothing happens. You do not lose the spell slot or prepared spell, but neither does it activate. The only loss is in the time you spent attempting the spell.

    If the cast time of a spell is greater than one Full Round Action, the caster must make additional Concentration checks to successfully complete the spell. If the casting-time is measured in rounds, they must make a concentration check each round until the spell resolves. If the cast-time is measured in minutes, they must make a check every minute. If not rushed or otherwise threatened, casters can take 10 on these checks.
    The DC for these checks is equal to one half (rounded down) of the initial check required to cast the spell.
    Spoiler
    Show
    [Note: the intention for the concentration checks is that casters should always be able to pass them under good circumstances, such as buffing before a fight; it is only when the situation is dire that it becomes a problem, which I feel only heightens the tension, and is a good thing. The spellcraft checks should succeed about as often as attack rolls.]
    One odd thing is that you have the difficulty of succesffuly affecting an opponent go up with spell level, which is the opposite of base D&D. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but might have some odd effects.
    Critical Success and Failure
    Due to the vagaries of magic and the unpredictable nature of ultimate cosmic power, a spell is sometimes more powerful than normal or unexpectedly fails completely.
    For Arcane casters, on a natural roll of 20, the spell is more successful than normal, and the spell is cast successfully, regardless of SR or the actual check needed to cast the spell. For Elemental casters, a spell is automatically successful on a roll of 18, 19, or 20.
    See the description of each spell for the additional effects of an automatic success.
    For Arcane casters, on a roll of 1, the spell automatically fails, regardless of the necessary check. For Elemental casters, a spell automatically fails on a roll of 1 or 2. In general, elemental magic is more powerful but also riskier than arcane magic.

    When a spell fails automatically, roll a d10 to determine the effect of the failure.
    1-6: You flub some small gesture or syllable, and the spell consumes your daily spell slot or prepared spell, but does not cast.
    7-10: Critical spell failure! The spell nearly activates, but at the last moment you make some small mistake, and the spell rushes out in a way you did not expect. See the individual spell description for the effects of a critical failure.

    Divine spellcasters do not have critical successes or failures with their spells, due to the nature of the way they receive and use magical energy. They still need to make casting checks, however; a roll of a 1 or 20 is simply calculated like any other number. This means that spells may will not automatically fail on a 1, but they also might not succeed even on a roll of 20.

    Some spells do not have additional effects if you roll a critical success of failure. The spell is still automatically successful on a roll of 20, and still fails on a roll of 1; there are just no other additional bonuses or penalties (other than using up the spell slot if you fail).
    I'm not fond of critical success or failure, or for that matter automatic hit/miss. It seems odd that Ajax the Reaver of Flesh, 20th level barbarian, always has a 5% chance to just plain miss when he swings his axe at Jim the Lowly Commoner and it is just worse if he has a 2% chance of fumbling said axe. Still, this isn't game breaking.
    Spell Resistance
    Nearly every person and creature has some innate level of Spell Resistance (SR) that helps them avoid and shrug off the effect of spells. The SR of a creature or person is equal to their base SR, plus their save bonus depending on which school the spell is from, plus any bonuses from class features, items, or other spells.
    • For spells from the Transmutation and Necromany schools, add your Fortitude save bonus to your base SR to determine the resistance you have against a spell.
    • For spells from the schools of Illusion, Enchantment Divination, and Abjuration add your Will save bonus to your base SR.
    • For Evocation and Conjuration spells, add your Reflex save bonus to base SR.

    If you are unconscious or otherwise totally incapacitated, do not add your saves to your base SR.
    Just for clarification; it is intended that you add your entire save bonus, including feats and ability modifiers, to your base SR.

    Base Spell Resistance
    {table=head] ECL/CR|BSR|<>| ECL/CR|BSR|<>| ECL/CR|BSR

    1 | 5 | |11 |9 | | 21|17

    2 | 5 | | 12 |9 | | 22|17

    3 | 5 | | 13 |10 | | 23|18

    4 | 6 | | 14 |11 | | 24|18

    5 | 6 | | 15 |12 | | 25|19

    6 | 6 | | 16 |13 | | 26|19

    7 | 7 | | 17 |14 | | 27|19

    8 | 7 | | 18 |15 | | 28|20

    9 | 8 | | 19 |16 | | 29|20

    10 | 8 | | 20 |16 | | 30|20[/table]
    *creatures with a CR of less than 1 have a base SR of 3

    Generally, this SR only counts towards spells that specifically target the person, or if the effects of the spell are inherently magical. For example, SR helps repel the effects of both a Charm Person or a Fireball spell, because they target an individual. SR also helps resist the effects of an Entanglement spell because the vines and roots are magical in nature. SR does not help prevent against the effects of an Earthquake spell, because the spell does not target a person, and the effects (shaking, collapsing walls, fissures) are non-magical results of the spell.

    For spells that target an area, compare your SR against the Spellcraft check made when the spell was cast. If the check is higher than your SR, the spell works normally; if the check is lower, you can resist the effects of the spell for a short time. If you spend time inside the affected area, the spell will continuously work to overcome your SR. Your effective SR against that spell will slowly decrease until the spell can affect you. If the spell was cast in the last 24 hours, your effective SR against that spell decreases by 1 each round. If the spell was cast in the last month (30 day period) your effective SR decrease by 1 each minute. If the spell was cast in the last year your effective SR decrease by 1 each hour. If the spell was cast more than a year ago, your effective SR decreases by 1 every 12 hours.
    Not all Area of Effect spells allow checks against SR. Alarm, for example, triggers automatically, regardless of how high your SR is.

    If you are attempting to cast a spell on yourself, your body and mind ‘recognizes’ your own brand of magic, and automatically reduces your SR against that particular spell to 0, not including any magic items your may be in possession of that grant increases to SR. A friendly target who is aware of what you are doing may reduce their SR to one-half its normal amount, not including any items they may be wearing that grant additional SR. This effect can function even if the target is Unconscious or otherwise incapacitated.
    Dead targets do not have SR, though the Undead, being products of magic, may have SR. Same goes for golems and other constructs.

    Non-magical objects generally have no SR. Non-magical objects in some one's possession use that creature's SR. Magical items generally have SR of 10+the level of the magic effect on them. They may use their possessor's SR if it is higher.

    If you are unsure of whether or not to use a spell-check or a resistance check when casting, look under the description of each individual spell; there should be a guide to help you determine what DC you need to overcome:
    • Regular- make your spellcraft check against the DC to cast the spell
    • Target Resistance- make your spell check against the target of the spell’s SR
    • AOE Regular- make a spellcraft check when you cast the spell; when someone enters the area they are immediately subject to the spells affects.
    • AOE Resistance- make a spellcraft check when you cast the spell; when someone enters the area compare their SR to that check to see if they are affected by the spell. Alternatively for Instantaneous spells, make a regular spellcraft check to cast the spell, then compare that to each person in the targeted area individually.

    Spoiler
    Show
    [Note: I realized after I started working through this that when players fail to overcome SR, I was treating the spell the same as if they had failed a non-target spellcraft check. What happens to the spell in this case? With the rules I laid out, its as if the spell never cast, which made sense for things like Earthquake, but less so for Fireball or Ray of Frost.
    My intent was that SR allows players to shrug off magic effects, but under my own rules, a wizard might “cast” fireballs all day and never actually get one to hit a player. After thinking for a while, I decided that there was no easy solution that didn’t involve adding more checks and complicating the process further, but I didn’t have a problem with this.
    Rather than thinking of it as “the player dodges or simply ignores the effects of magical fire”, their SR makes them too ‘slippery’ for the wizard to get a ‘lock’ on them, and so he can’t cast the spell. Only if he manages to overcome the SR can his spells hit the target. After thinking some more, I decided I actually liked this better, since I was having trouble wrapping my brain around how a magical fireball might NOT cause someone damage without involving counter-magic. In addition, this adds a little longevity to blaster-type casters, since they don’t (usually) have to worry about wasting spells on targets with high SR.]
    I'm not sure I like that failing to hit an opponent means you never cast the spell. Maybe it would be better to suppose that the spell is cast and merely misses, but for some reason the slot isn't expended?
    Caster Level
    I’ve always disliked that caster level could somehow be different from character level. If you see anything that reads “caster’s level” or “/level” just assume it means the same as ECL. I’m convinced I can do everything I want to with ECL, and Spellcraft checks. I am emliminating spell-level and the Heighten spell feat; spells will scale automatically and any need for an opposing check against a spell can be done via spellcraft.
    If you can explain to me why your Fighter 19/Wizard 1 or other Gish-combo that can make a few more gallons of water is game breaking, I’ll reconsider my stance.
    I agree with this. It makes multiclassing more viable without breaking anything. Even if a Fighter 19/Wizard 1 gained access to a few really powerful spells, for example if you were to rule that he didn't have to select 1st level spells, he could only cast a couple of them every day, they would be weaker because he wouldn't have the feats and ability scores to support them, and doing all that requires you to lose some of your potential Fighter abilities. That might still sound like a good idea until you take into account the action economy; the Fighter 19/Wizard 1 might be more versatile, which might be worth it, but in any given turn his actions will be slightly less powerful than a Wizard 20 or Fighter20. Of course that is only true if you succeed in balancing magic with non-magic.
    Bonus Spells
    Bonus spells are now always determined by Intellect.
    You only recieve bonus spells if you would normally recieve spells of that level from your class.
    Spoiler
    Show
    [Ok, I’m sure this is gonna cause some unholy ruckus, so lemme explain before you break out the pitchforks and torches. It took a long while to settle on what I wanted to do here, so please be assured that this is not a decision I am making on a whim. Basically, I feel that if the only difference between two classes of casters is their primary casting attribute, then that is a failure of the RAW. I fully intend to see that both wizards and sorcerers feel completely different by the time I am done (at the very least, as different as one melee class feels from another).
    Just as Strength/Constitution forms the backbone of melee classes, I want Intellect and Wisdom to be the caster-combo. Casters who end up with Intellect/Charisma will be like Dexterity builds; they have a different focus and flavor, but can accomplish much the same thing.
    I am planning on decreasing the base level of spells that most casters get, and increasing the amount they get as bonus spells. The end result will be that primary casters will end up at about the same spot, but hopefully with their SAD somewhat reduced. The other important change is that hybrid classes will not be the same as primary casters UNLESS they invest in a spellcaster build, at the expense of their melee. Non-primary casters (paladins, rangers, maybe bards, etc) will either stay the same, or get their base spells increased slightly so that they do not need to add Intellect to their already extensive MAD. These classes generally have less powerful and less varied spells, so even if someone stacked intellect and wisdom on their paladin, I am unconcerned that it would be game breaking.]

    Bonus Spells by Level
    {table=head] Score |Modifier|0 |1st|2nd|3rd|4th|5th|6th|7th|8th|9th

    1|-5|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--

    2-3|-4|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--

    4-5|-3|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--

    6-7|-2|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--

    8-9|-1|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--

    10-11|0|1|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--

    12-13|+1|2|1|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--

    14-15|+2|2|2|1|--|--|--|--|--|--|--

    16-17|+3|3|2|2|1|--|--|--|--|--|--

    18-19|+4|3|3|2|2|1|--|--|--|--|--

    20-21|+5|3|3|3|2|2|1|--|--|--|--

    22-23|+6|4|3|3|3|2|2|1|--|--|--

    24-25|+7|4|4|3|3|3|2|2|1|--|--

    26-27|+8|4|4|4|3|3|3|2|2|1|--

    28-29|+9|4|4|4|4|3|3|3|2|2|1

    30-31|+10|5|4|4|4|4|3|3|3|2|2

    32-33|+11|5|5|4|4|4|4|3|3|3|2

    34-35|+12|5|5|5|4|4|4|4|3|3|3

    36-37|+13|5|5|5|5|4|4|4|4|3|3

    38-39|+14|5|5|5|5|5|4|4|4|4|3

    40-41|+15|6|5|5|5|5|5|4|4|4|4

    42-43|+16|6|6|5|5|5|5|5|4|4|4

    44-45|+17|6|6|6|5|5|5|5|5|4|4

    etc...|...|...|...|...|...|...|...|...|...|...|...[/table]
    From a game design aspect I think this works to force spellcasters out of SAD, but I'm not positive I like the roleplaying aspect of every spellcaster being keyed to the same score. Maybe have every caster use two scores but have them be different for different classes?
    Range
    The range for spells has been decreased somewhat.
    Long – 100 ft + 10 ft/level
    Medium – 50 ft + 5 ft/level
    Short – 25 ft + 5/ft 2 levels
    Spoiler
    Show
    [Formerly high level spellcasters could hurl spells nearly a quarter mile, well outside the effective range of all but the best archers. Even short and medium range spells easily outdistanced what most non-primary spellcasters could handle. Combat rarely took place at those distances, but it was just one more thing that could lead to abuse and imbalance.]
    You could alternatively allow archers more range.
    Metamagic
    Metamagic reducers do not stack; only the largest applies to any particular spell. Metamagic reducers cannot reduce a spells level slot below +0.
    Spoiler
    Show
    [I intend to tweak some of the most egregious ways to abuse metamagic, mainly Arcane Thesis and DMM. I’ll probably leave most of the metamagic feats where they are, unless someone brings a specific case to my attention.
    If you think some metamagic feats are overly inhibitive and choose to alter the enhancement cost (spell slot level increase) I recommend you work within the following philosophy: Any metamagic feat that has a purely positive benefit should have a minimum increase of +1. If you want a metamagic feat to have a level change of +0, there should be an equal possibility of loss or ineffectiveness.
    For example, if you wanted to charge your spells with lawful (axiomatic) energy to be more effective and deal extra damage to chaotic creatures, then it should have a spell slot increase of at least +1. This is a fairly specific effect, but the cost should only be +0 if it also was less effective and dealt less damage to lawful creatures.]
    I'd just get rid of metamagic reducers, and possibly get rid of or overhaul metamagic itself.
    Counterspelling
    The counterspelling mechanic has been removed and replaced with an actuall spell called "counterspell". It is my hope that I can make this more usefull without it being overpowering.
    Interesting. When I get to the spells I'll comment on this.
    Spell Books
    For casters who use spellbooks to prepare their daily use of magic, they not only record the exact incantations and gestures of a spell, but also any notes on their research or experience devoted to learning the spell, as well as records of it's use and possibly even anecdotes about its effectiveness or lack thereof. This is why several pages of a spellbook may be devoted to a single spell that is ostensibly only one word long.
    0 level spells take up 1 page
    1st-6th level spells take up 2 pages
    7th-9th level spells take up 4 pages
    10th+ level spells take up 8 pages

    A standard spellbook is 150 pages long.
    Many magic users will also keep a backup or travel-sized spellbook, which has their most commonly used spells and can be stored and hidden much more easily. Such a spellbook normally holds 30 pages worth of spells.
    Why can't I just leave all that extraneous stuff out of my book?
    Spell-Like Abilities
    Spell-like abilities that do not target another creature are considered to always be succesful (as if you had rolled a natural 20), however they cannot crit. For purposes of overcoming spell resistance, the spellcraft check of a spell-like ability is considered to be equal to 20+ the caster's ECL or CR.
    Is there a way for monsters to increase their spellcraft check, for example with a feat? A few monsters are designed to rely more on their spell-like abilities.
    Feats
    Charismatic Casting [General] (new feat)
    Prerequisite: the ability to cast arcane, divine, or elemental spells
    Benefit: You now add your Charisma bonus (if any) to your Spellcraft checks.
    In addition or in place of wisdom?
    Critical Casting [General] (new feat)
    Prerequisite: the ability to cast arcane, divine, or elemental spells
    Benefit: You increase the range of your spell’s chance to critically succeed by 2, and the range of your spell’s chance to critically fail by 1.
    I like the slight downside. Makes the choice more interesting.
    Spell Focus [General]
    Choose a School of Magic
    Benefit: You gain a +1 bonus to your Spellcraft checks whenever casting spells from your chosen school.
    Special: You can gain this feat multiple times; its effects do not stack. Each time you take this feat you select another school to gain the bonus.

    Improved Spell Focus [General]
    Choose a School of Magic to which you have already applied the Spell Focus Feat.
    Benefit: You gain a +1 bonus to your Spellcraft checks whenever casting spells from your chosen school. This bonus stacks with the bonus from Spell Focus.
    Special: You can gain this feat multiple times. Its effects do not stack. Each time you take the feat, it applies to a new school of magic to which you already have applied the Spell Focus feat.

    Greater Spell Focus [General]
    Choose a School of Magic to which you have already applied the Improved Spell Focus Feat.
    Benefit: You gain a +2 bonus to your Spellcraft checks whenever casting spells from your chosen school. This bonus stacks with the bonus from Spell Focus and Improved Spell Focus.
    Special: You can gain this feat multiple times. Its effects do not stack. Each time you take the feat, it applies to a new school of magic to which you already have applied the Improved Spell Focus feat.

    Spell Penetration [General]
    Benefit: You gain a +2 bonus to your Spellcraft checks made to overcome a creature’s spell resistance.

    Greater Spell Penetration [General]
    Prerequisite: Spell Penetration
    Benefit: You gain a +3 bonus to your Spellcraft checks made to overcome a creature’s spell resistance. This bonus stacks with the one from Spell Penetration.
    Just to clarify, do these stack? Or maybe I misunderstand how they work?
    Arcane Thesis [General]
    You have studied a small group of spells in depth. Your expertise grants formidable, though narrowly focused, arcane mastery.
    Prerequisite: Knowledge (aracana) 9 ranks, ability to cast arcane spells
    Benefit: Choose one level of spells from any one school to be your arcane thesis spells. When casting those spells, you gain a +2 to Spellcraft checks. When you apply metamagic feats to these spells, the enhanced spell uses up a spell slot one level lower than normal for the total (sum) of the metamagic modification.
    Retraining: At any time you would gain a new spell slot, you may pick a different set of spell to apply Arcane Thesis to.
    Seems overpowered.
    Divine Metamagic [Divine]
    You can channel energy into some of your divine spells to make them more powerful.
    Prerequisite: Ability to channel energy for healing or dealing damage like a cleric*
    Benefit: When you attempt to cast a divine spell, you can take the positive or negative energy you would normally channel and use it to decrease the cost of applying a metamagic feat to that spell. You may spend one daily use of channeled energy to reduce the level increase for a metamagic feat by 1. For example, Jozan the cleric could sacrifice one use of channeled energy to reduce necessary spell slot for his empowered Holy Smite from 6 (4+2) to 5 (4+1).

    You may not use this to reduce more than 1 metamagic feat applied to a any single spell. If you are required to prepare your spells ahead of time, then you must choose to apply both the metamagic feat and this effect at that time. Once you have done so, you loose one daily use of channeled energy immediately, regardless of whether or not you eventually cast the spell.
    *I prefer the pathfinder version of channeling energy rather than rebuking/bolstering undead. Feel free to change this back if you don’t use it.
    Probably okay if you don't have something like a nightstick.
    Spell Resistance [General] (new feat)
    Choose a School of Magic
    Benefit: You gain a +2 bonus to your SR against spells from the chosen school.
    Special: You can gain this feat multiple times; its effects do not stack. Each time you take this feat you select another school to gain the bonus.
    Seems odd that this is school based.
    Heighten Spell [Metamagic] REMOVED
    There is no longer a use for it. If some one can come up with good alternative effect, I will reinstate it.
    It might still be useful if, for example, you still use Globe of Invulnerability. Far too specific a use to waste a feat on, but you might want to consider that.
    Last edited by Drolyt; 2012-02-28 at 04:40 PM.

  19. - Top - End - #19
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    bobthe6th's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Under the midnight sun
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: A new system for using magic in D&D 3.5/3.PF (PEACH)

    so... why did ya neuter call lighting? It seemed a good way to let a caster contribute for a while with just one slot, but at the same time eat their actions if they want to use it. I would almost rather see more blast spells built that way, rather then being one off effects...

    secoundly, make cure(anything) necromancy. It is, and has been silly ever since it was added to bloated conjurition. Fight the overpowered conjuration, the spell school that acts like 2-3 schools.
    Last edited by bobthe6th; 2012-02-28 at 06:52 PM.
    Avatar by Szilard, thank you sir for the fine work!

    my home brew. you should PEACH them...
    Telekineticist
    Razor
    Shield
    blasterv4
    mindbender

  20. - Top - End - #20
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Deepbluediver's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The US of A

    Default Re: A new system for using magic in D&D 3.5/3.PF (PEACH)

    Quote Originally Posted by Ernir View Post
    Weird, because all of the methods you mentioned work here. And you're the first I've heard having problems.
    ...
    The latest release and the working version are on different hosts. If neither works, I'd say it's very likely that the problem is somewhere on your end. Is the browser up to date?
    Well, whatever the issue was with the links in your sig the ones you provided here work fine. I'm been picking and reading individual sections of it over the last couple of days; I may borrow a few ideas, like combining some of the less broadly applicable spells.

    What I like the most though, is the spell-points system. I know there is a published spell-point variant (probably in UA) and that reactions tend to fall somewhere between "meh" and "hate it!" but if I could get it working, I think I might like to use it for my eventual sorcerer fix. As a way of differentiating between various arcane casters, I'd be curious to see how prepared spells and spells points synergized/clashed when used in the same system.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ernir View Post
    I am not sold on the critical failures, though. Those aren't considered a very good idea for mundane attackers, what makes them a good idea for casters? =/
    Quote Originally Posted by Drolyt View Post
    I'm not fond of critical success or failure, or for that matter automatic hit/miss. It seems odd that Ajax the Reaver of Flesh, 20th level barbarian, always has a 5% chance to just plain miss when he swings his axe at Jim the Lowly Commoner and it is just worse if he has a 2% chance of fumbling said axe. Still, this isn't game breaking.
    Ok, I get what you guys are saying, and I see that it makes sense in a lot of circumstances. I personally feel that random-chance effects can add to the feeling of excitment a game, but I understand that NO ONE likes to see their character fail and above all the game needs to be FUN.

    With magic, as you advance in spells levels, you are channeling more and more magical energy, so no matter how good you get at cantrips I'd still like to leave in the failure chance for your highest level spells. I can see how it would be annoying for a grand arch-mage to critically fumble his "Ray of Frost" spell, and I'll consider a fix, either as a feat, class feature, or just to the rules in general that removes the penalty for spells of a relatively lower level.

    Not to get off topic, but now that you've brought it up this also seems to be a more serious problem with melee than I had previously considered, and I'll want to think about it some more.

    Quote Originally Posted by Drolyt View Post
    Sounds fine. I'm not positive why there needs to be three (or two or nine) types of magic, but there's nothing wrong with it.
    In addition to the fluff, there are minor mechanical difference, and I think variety is interesting.

    One odd thing is that you have the difficulty of succesffuly affecting an opponent go up with spell level, which is the opposite of base D&D. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but might have some odd effects.
    It's not the difficulty of affecting a person that goes up, the increased difficulty is in the casting a more powerful spell.

    I'm not sure I like that failing to hit an opponent means you never cast the spell. Maybe it would be better to suppose that the spell is cast and merely misses, but for some reason the slot isn't expended?
    This is one of those things where I've wracked my brain for hours over various combinations, and at the end of the day I'm still trying to cram a square peg into a round hole; I just can't make everything fit, particularly since you can actually waste an AOE spell if you roll high enough to cast the spell but not to overcome SR. Yes, fluff-wise it probably makes more sense for a spell to "miss" than for it to not fire, but I went with what I felt was mechanicaly the better version.

    Try to think of it this way: a spell like Disintegrate is a guided missile for shooting down aircraft (or a sniper rifle at low levels ), and you won't fire the missile until you actually lock on to your target. You COULD wildy fire missiles in random directions, but chances are you'll run out of missles long before you hit anything important. A spell like Fireball is more like napalm (and not just because of the burning). Your target an area, rather than a person or target, and just dump everything on that spot; whatever ends up in the line of fire (must...resist...puns...) takes damage almost by conicedence.

    I agree with this. It makes multiclassing more viable without breaking anything.
    I would actually like to have a system where all classes increase your spellcasting to some degree (like a PrC's +spellcasting-level feature), just like attack rolls, saves, and skill points stack. What I mean is, some way to let a Fighter 10/Wizard 1 actually get more frequent and more powerful spells than a plain 1st level wizard, but I have yet to come up with anything that helps out the gishes without becoming easily gamebreaking at Wizard 10/Sorcerer 10, or Wiz 1/Sor 1/Clr 1/Drd 1/Brd 1, etc.

    Also, yes, I realize that this would add to a caster's power level, which is something they really DON'T need and is mostly why I haven't tried harder to work it out, yet.

    Of course that is only true if you succeed in balancing magic with non-magic.
    So much depends on this.
    I'm attacking the problem from two directions; I'm trying to add power and versatility to the melee classes, while downgrading the most world-breaking features of the casters.

    There's also the question of just what kind of balance you want; I could just eliminate every spell school except for Evocation and call it a day. But I am trying to avoid a fix where every character ends up the same except for fluff.
    I don't mind if primary casters end up more versatile and even maybe a little more powerful than non-casters, so long as they have some weaknesses and checks on their power.

    From a game design aspect I think this works to force spellcasters out of SAD, but I'm not positive I like the roleplaying aspect of every spellcaster being keyed to the same score. Maybe have every caster use two scores but have them be different for different classes?
    Originally, I was going to make the spellcraft bonus come from either wisdom or charisma, depending on the class, but I ended up deciding I didn't like that for reasons that I can't remember well enough to articulate right now.
    Roleplaying is largely dependent on the player, the group, and even the GM, and I'm not going to try and tell people how/what they should roleplay. Generally, I don't see a problem with "all melee characters are strong, all magic users are smart". And I've largely left out what I consider to be the most important roleplaying stat: Charisma.

    This is one of those "way in the future" ideas, and you shouldn't take it to mean anything critical, but if I ever get around to learning how psionics works and redoing it, I think Charisma would make a good primary stat for that.

    You could alternatively allow archers more range.
    That wouldn't help anyone who's not an archer. Right now the lowest value of a long-range spell is about equal to the range increment of a longbow, which doesn't scale with level. I think it's sufficient to allow glass-cannon magic users (and we all know just how "glassy" they actually are once they start layering on those defensive enchantments) to stay out of melee range of the barbarian and his greataxe if they really try, and if they can't then that's part of balance.

    I'd just get rid of metamagic reducers, and possibly get rid of or overhaul metamagic itself.
    I like the IDEA of metamagic, but I've got enough on my plate atm to do a complete overhaul of metamagic. There are a few fixes out there I like, but holding on on addapting them for my own use yet.

    Why can't I just leave all that extraneous stuff out of my book?
    Because it wouldn't allow you to prepare the spell properly. It would be like having a cookbook that just had pictures of the finished food, but didn't actually list any of the ingredients or instructions for what to do with them.
    I know there are feats out there that let you prepare spells without your spellbook, or by using alternate spellbooks. I'll try to think up some additional rule that lets you prepare spells without a spellbook, but likely at an increased chance of critical failure.

    To my knowledge, the PHB didn't try to explain it at all, and this is really just me attempting to add a little fluff. I've increased the size of a generic spellbook and decreased the number of pages a spells requires, what more do you want from me!?!

    Is there a way for monsters to increase their spellcraft check, for example with a feat? A few monsters are designed to rely more on their spell-like abilities.
    I didn't make one, but I'm pretty sure there are actually monster-feats, if you want to homebrew some of your own. Alternatively, feel free to modify any monster to have a higher innate SLA bonus; the rules are written so that every class feature, racial trait, feat and skill is basically about circumventing them anyway.

    This reminds me though, I need to add something about supernatural abilities.

    In addition or in place of wisdom?
    In addition to. A caster who starts trying to stack Int, Wis, AND Cha is getting pretty MAD, which I think balances it. The original intent of this feat, though, was to prevent Paladins, Bards, and the like from being even more MAD and needing to stack wisdom/intellect in addition to Cha and their melee stats. When I do class fixes I'm probably gonna help cut down on their MAD some more via machanical changes.

    I like the slight downside. Makes the choice more interesting.
    Yes, originally the feat just increased both by an equal amount, but then I was like "it's a feat dammit! there needs to be a benefit, not just a balance!"
    I also originally had a feat that decreased crit chance, but knowing how loss-averse players tend to be I felt that everyone would take it, and ultimately it would make things too boring.

    Just to clarify, do these stack? Or maybe I misunderstand how they work?
    No, they stack. The idea was that you could take three feats and improve your overall spellcasting, or you could take just 2 feats and gain a better increase, but only to some spells that directly affect your enemies.
    Rereading them I actually want to go back and change the wording to clarify a few things.

    Seems overpowered.
    The original feat allowed you to reduce each metamagic modifier by 1, seperately, meaning you could stack four +1 modifiers on a single spell and not change it's casting level at all, and that was before any other meta-magic reducers where used. A lot of magic fixes just ban this outright, but I am trying very hard to ban as little as possible, because I feel it's more interesting to fix than discard.
    I reduced the power of the feat but broadened it's applicability to compensate.

    Probably okay if you don't have something like a nightstick.
    Again, the original feat made for very easy metamagic abuse, and many fixes either banned it, banned stacking uses, or banned nightsticks. I leave further modifications up to the preference of individual DMs.

    Seems odd that this is school based.
    This needs work, and/or more feats. I haven't tried remaking any magic items yet, but my idea was that you could get low level all-spell resistance easily (from any source, feat or item) and that an increasingly narrow focus would provide an increasing value.
    For example in terms of cost: 2 spell resistance=5 Arcane SR=10 Transmutation SR= 20 fire SR.*
    [*These values brought to you by the institute of PNOoMA; please don't take them as written in stone.]

    It might still be useful if, for example, you still use Globe of Invulnerability. Far too specific a use to waste a feat on, but you might want to consider that.
    Like I said, if some one can offer a good reason for keeping it, I'll reconsider, but for now I'm designing spells to not rely on it, and I would rather work it's benefit into a few individual spells as needed.


    Thanks for all your feedback! You've given me plenty of things to work on, and I hope I've cleared up some of your confusion.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rater202 View Post
    It's not called common because the sense is common, it's called common because it's about common things.
    Homebrew Extended Signature!

  21. - Top - End - #21
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Deepbluediver's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The US of A

    Default Re: A new system for using magic in D&D 3.5/3.PF (PEACH)

    (replying to this seperately, since that other post is already way too long)

    Quote Originally Posted by bobthe6th View Post
    so... why did ya neuter call lighting? It seemed a good way to let a caster contribute for a while with just one slot, but at the same time eat their actions if they want to use it. I would almost rather see more blast spells built that way, rather then being one off effects...
    I don't think I neutered it, I did change the way it works though. This goes back partly to the comment I made about balance before. This spells starts being used at 5th-6th level, and at that it's going to be very difficult for any melee class is going to be able to match my new version for sheer damage potential if you hit an area with a large number of creatures in it. By contrast though, I don't want a caster to be able to use a single spell any then get repeating damage for an entire encounter. The caster's power is balanced by a more pressing need to watch their resources, and a harsher cut off if/when they run out.
    I plan on reducing or limiting a lot of other spells as well.

    Also, I've still got Call Lighting Storm to redo, and I'll try to make it more like the original, so there is some variety and not just an upgraded damage version of the same thing.

    However, since in order to be played, any fix must above all be FUN, I am willing to reconsider any spell that you don't like. If anyone can offer an alternative and satisfactorly explain to me why it is balanced, I'll consider adding/changing to my spell fix.

    secoundly, make cure(anything) necromancy. It is, and has been silly ever since it was added to bloated conjurition. Fight the overpowered conjuration, the spell school that acts like 2-3 schools.
    I saw that in Ernir's fix as well, and it intrigues me. My first reaction is that healing spells do not fit the classic view of "necromancy" but I've sacrificed flavor for mechanics before, and I'd be willing to do it again, if need be.
    I do like that it gives clerics (the classic healers) more of a reason for being so directly involved with/against the undead. It seems like this would be giving the Necromancy school effective control over all postive AND negative energy style spells, but since arcane and divine spells lists tend to be seperate anyway that's probably not to much of an issue.

    Something else to consider: the PHB II (at least I think it was the PHB 2) introduced a concept of dual-school spells, which I had mixed feelings about, but if you want to get really involved might make sense for a spell like Regnerate to be a Transmutation/Necromancy spell. But that's getting complicated; for now I will just consider swapping the healing spells into necromancy.
    Last edited by Deepbluediver; 2012-02-29 at 01:30 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rater202 View Post
    It's not called common because the sense is common, it's called common because it's about common things.
    Homebrew Extended Signature!

  22. - Top - End - #22
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    bobthe6th's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Under the midnight sun
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: A new system for using magic in D&D 3.5/3.PF (PEACH)

    The counter was really weak damage. 3d6 at leve 5 up is mid bow damage, so I see no harm in giving a magic bow for a top level spell... the curent spell is fire ball, with a duration and lightning damage. More uniqu.

    Also, necromancy=life manipulation. Even then, evocation makes more sense the conjurition, as it is energy summon V.S matter summoning.
    Avatar by Szilard, thank you sir for the fine work!

    my home brew. you should PEACH them...
    Telekineticist
    Razor
    Shield
    blasterv4
    mindbender

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •