Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
[L&L] Balancing the Wizards in D&D
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="howandwhy99" data-source="post: 5910151" data-attributes="member: 3192"><p><u>Cantrips as At-Will Magic</u>: </p><p>I'd really prefer this to be optional. Perhaps it could be made to be backwards compatible rather than forwards? I mean, instead of casting a 1st level spell to be able to perform a particular magic for 1 day, Cantrips could be modularly dropped for more spell slots? I strongly disagree that a Magic-User without spells is powerless or that spell casting is all a M-U does.</p><p></p><p><u>Keep Spells Under Control</u>: </p><p>This sounds like "Balance spells by spell level and make sure they are balanced." I have suspicions it really means weaker spells and fewer effects. And I'm not even going to get into how skill systems are notorious at not working in conjunction with magic systems.</p><p></p><p><u>Reducing Total Spell Slots</u>: </p><p>Honestly this is a character level problem. I'm not sure what your particular sentence phrasing might suggest, but spells castable per preparation (by day normally) are already pretty few. And by the time the higher spells are gained the lower ones are not as applicable because the challenges are not as applicable. One possible progression for a 10 level system:</p><p>1st = 1</p><p>2nd = 2</p><p>3rd = 2, 1</p><p>4th = 2, 2</p><p>5th = 3, 2, 1</p><p>6th = 3, 2, 2</p><p>7th = 3, 3, 2, 1</p><p>8th = 3, 3, 2, 2</p><p>9th = 3, 3, 3, 2, 1</p><p>10th = 3, 3, 3, 2, 2</p><p></p><p>Start a level later for clerics and we have a game that can handle 10 levels of play with 14 spells at once at most. Not too bad, and while spells never decrease in power it's the level of adventure that has increased to make them not overshadow other characters.</p><p></p><p>Count 2/level for learned spells and we get only 20 spells for certain in a M-U's spell book. Spells found as treasure, on scrolls, etc., % chance to learn, costs to copy, and everything else limits just how big that list can get. And it still is limited by the spell slots. Compare that to divine casters who cast fewer slots, but gain a set number of spells / spell level. Gaining spells from treasure means selecting others to to be unavailable (until bought back in). Not bad, especially when it's remembered that Clerics are never full spell casters.</p><p></p><p><u>Spells Don't Automatically Scale</u>: </p><p>This sounds reasonable and basically refers to variable stats by caster level, especially effects like fireball damage. I don't think it's necessary, but I can always rewrite spells to scale again. Scaling spells are not unbalanced.</p><p></p><p><u>Spell casting Is Dangerous</u>: </p><p>This sounds like DCC and games from the 80s. It's definitely possible, but wasn't really the default in D&D. It wasn't the act of casting the spell that was dangerous. It was the impossibility to know exactly what the results would be that were. Additionally interfering with a spell could disrupt it, optionally with a possible bad result. Overcasting from a scroll or spell book carried even more potential backfires. Spell casting wasn't ever guaranteed, but it was more about side cases and determining how that lightning bolt bounced or the volume of a fireball blast that mattered more. Perhaps a roll could be had for saving a spell being cast with variable failure too? Sounds like a decent house rule.</p><p></p><p><u>Keep Magic Items Under Control</u>: </p><p>It sounds like you're going with a daily balance rather than an encounter-based one. Fighters typically got better attacks (magical +1), while wizards got more due to magic. It doesn't have to be high level stuff, but that would still balance out. The wand deal sounds fine.</p><p></p><p><u>Keep Buff Spells Under Control</u>: </p><p>Invisibility is balanced more by tactics, like covering exits, attacking a wide area, throwing dust or flour about, and the like. I might just remove any nerfs as a house rule.</p><p></p><p>Haste made it impossible to cast, including psionics, iirc. So this really was for non-casters to show their stuff. If classes were already better at an action like speed or attack, now that benefit pays off doubly (or trebly, or quadruply, ...)</p><p></p><p>Stoneskin, Shield, and Blur (and there are many others) sound like they've always been.</p><p></p><p><u>Creativity, Not Dominance</u>: </p><p>Improvisation and number crunching are the same thing and both are supported when the "rules" are behind the screen, but you know this. Improvisation for some is exclusively feel good, impossible-to-achieve wishes. I see it more as quick thinking, especially when under duress. Still, this whole point is the best news yet for spell casters.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="howandwhy99, post: 5910151, member: 3192"] [U]Cantrips as At-Will Magic[/U]: I'd really prefer this to be optional. Perhaps it could be made to be backwards compatible rather than forwards? I mean, instead of casting a 1st level spell to be able to perform a particular magic for 1 day, Cantrips could be modularly dropped for more spell slots? I strongly disagree that a Magic-User without spells is powerless or that spell casting is all a M-U does. [U]Keep Spells Under Control[/U]: This sounds like "Balance spells by spell level and make sure they are balanced." I have suspicions it really means weaker spells and fewer effects. And I'm not even going to get into how skill systems are notorious at not working in conjunction with magic systems. [U]Reducing Total Spell Slots[/U]: Honestly this is a character level problem. I'm not sure what your particular sentence phrasing might suggest, but spells castable per preparation (by day normally) are already pretty few. And by the time the higher spells are gained the lower ones are not as applicable because the challenges are not as applicable. One possible progression for a 10 level system: 1st = 1 2nd = 2 3rd = 2, 1 4th = 2, 2 5th = 3, 2, 1 6th = 3, 2, 2 7th = 3, 3, 2, 1 8th = 3, 3, 2, 2 9th = 3, 3, 3, 2, 1 10th = 3, 3, 3, 2, 2 Start a level later for clerics and we have a game that can handle 10 levels of play with 14 spells at once at most. Not too bad, and while spells never decrease in power it's the level of adventure that has increased to make them not overshadow other characters. Count 2/level for learned spells and we get only 20 spells for certain in a M-U's spell book. Spells found as treasure, on scrolls, etc., % chance to learn, costs to copy, and everything else limits just how big that list can get. And it still is limited by the spell slots. Compare that to divine casters who cast fewer slots, but gain a set number of spells / spell level. Gaining spells from treasure means selecting others to to be unavailable (until bought back in). Not bad, especially when it's remembered that Clerics are never full spell casters. [U]Spells Don't Automatically Scale[/U]: This sounds reasonable and basically refers to variable stats by caster level, especially effects like fireball damage. I don't think it's necessary, but I can always rewrite spells to scale again. Scaling spells are not unbalanced. [U]Spell casting Is Dangerous[/U]: This sounds like DCC and games from the 80s. It's definitely possible, but wasn't really the default in D&D. It wasn't the act of casting the spell that was dangerous. It was the impossibility to know exactly what the results would be that were. Additionally interfering with a spell could disrupt it, optionally with a possible bad result. Overcasting from a scroll or spell book carried even more potential backfires. Spell casting wasn't ever guaranteed, but it was more about side cases and determining how that lightning bolt bounced or the volume of a fireball blast that mattered more. Perhaps a roll could be had for saving a spell being cast with variable failure too? Sounds like a decent house rule. [U]Keep Magic Items Under Control[/U]: It sounds like you're going with a daily balance rather than an encounter-based one. Fighters typically got better attacks (magical +1), while wizards got more due to magic. It doesn't have to be high level stuff, but that would still balance out. The wand deal sounds fine. [U]Keep Buff Spells Under Control[/U]: Invisibility is balanced more by tactics, like covering exits, attacking a wide area, throwing dust or flour about, and the like. I might just remove any nerfs as a house rule. Haste made it impossible to cast, including psionics, iirc. So this really was for non-casters to show their stuff. If classes were already better at an action like speed or attack, now that benefit pays off doubly (or trebly, or quadruply, ...) Stoneskin, Shield, and Blur (and there are many others) sound like they've always been. [U]Creativity, Not Dominance[/U]: Improvisation and number crunching are the same thing and both are supported when the "rules" are behind the screen, but you know this. Improvisation for some is exclusively feel good, impossible-to-achieve wishes. I see it more as quick thinking, especially when under duress. Still, this whole point is the best news yet for spell casters. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
[L&L] Balancing the Wizards in D&D
Top