Monte Cook's Design Thoughts On Spellcasters

[Papewaio of The Org]

This part of character balance (like the rest) is system & DM determined.

Just as encounters can be made less difficult for a party that is not min-max rollplayers but who are instead roleplayers. The DM can change things with the pacing of the game. Balance it out so that each PC is a star at some moment.

Resting can be countered with:
Encounters, and ones that normally would be easy for magic so that it teaches the players to keep some in reserve.
Mechanics ie you can only rest once a day, you suffer faitgue so you need to rest longer ... remember how tired you get swatting for a big exam, reading and rereading textbooks for hours on end... give your mages a headache.
Storyline ie you have a deadline and resting will make you fail to get there. So no resting after stealing the statue in the temple while it collapeses around you. A tighter pacing has higher tension and makes a game go faster and leads to more intense cliffhangers. Imagine watching Aliens and the marines could go back and restock on their spaceship every ten minutes, it ain't as dramatic.

The other side is mages spells are more important the less magic is available in a supermarket style in a campaign. When everyone can buy mithral chain +2, its no longer special 'magic' it is just regular hardware just as if you went down to your local hardware store and stocked up on off the shelf components. Mages magic is part of a system and it won't look so magical if everyone is equipped with wands, staves, rods and items galore that can spam magic.

The main issue that I have with the article was this:

There was also a balancing mechanic inherent in the system that we didn't care for. It was deliberately set up so that spellcasters were more powerful than other classes at higher levels, and were less powerful at lower levels. You had to slog your way (and find a way to survive) through wizard levels 1 to 4 or so before you got really good stuff at level 5. This "delay of the fun" is a poor design choice.

It seems that their design principle has gone from making characters for players who are long term planners who can delay gratification to ADD kids who need fun now now now! Who IMDHO aren't the best choice of party mage in the first place.

 

[HeavenShallBurn]

I disagree with the problem and the solution. If I were writing 4e, I would dial back the spells per day. I'm still amazed that clerics get as many spells as they do. I'm not advocating a return to 1 hp wizards with a dagger, though. I like a lot of changes in 3e. Spells flying everywhere is perhaps not one of them.

I can understand that since coming here I've learned a lot of people prefer a less magical system. Personally I wouldn't find it nearly as fun as either a player or a GM, I prefer the off-the-wall unnaturally powerful aspect of things. I don't remember where I first heard it but I find this at the core of my gaming experience "It's fantasy you're supposed to be fantastic!"

Mechanically perhaps moving to a spontanteously cast spell-point system with reduced spell-points but constant slow recharge of spell-points throughout the day when not casting spells?

 

[Warbringer]

Interesting ideas, and I agre... to a point.

I do like the idea of disciplines (magical feats as far as I can tell), but I don't think it requires an overhaul of the system, simply access to feats a little quicker.

If the wizard had access to a feat every three levels, rtaher than dedicated feats at 5/10/15/20, then their is simple mechanic for access to these disciplines. Make these scale with level, so lower selections are not redundant and I think we are half way there.

Disciplines:

Lore of the Arcane Fist: The caster may deal a single magical attack that causes 1d6+Int damage to any single target. (This increases to 2d6 at 8th; 3d6 at 12th; 4d6 at 16th). This cannot be combined with any other attack as it requires a full round action. This is a ranged attack (not touch) with a max range of 5*caster level feet.

Shield of the Magical Flux: the caster creates about herself a shield that acts as defense against both mundane and magical attacks. The caster may deflect an attack aginst her by succeeding a spellcraft check equal t 15+damage caused. This may attempted on 1 attack for every 6 caster levels. In addition, the Shield grants the cast an SR equal to her caster level + Cha bonus.

Aid from Beyond the Veil: The caster can call on magical allies to come to his aid no matter where he is. This aid often takes the role of some lesser element, demon, creature or undead. The wizard summons forth a single creature with HD equal to his caster level. This creature may be commanded to perform one of the following actions: fight, defend, messenger. The wizard may only have 1 such creature come to his aid for each 4 levels, but may never have more than twice his level in HD summoned.


Just some ideas, need tuning...

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I’m not sure that I buy the “some people can’t play this class very well so we should get rid of it in exchange for something that’s idiot proof” is a very compelling argument.

I'm not sure that wanting to do something in the game instead of watching other people do it makes you an idiot.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

It seems that their design principle has gone from making characters for players who are long term planners who can delay gratification to ADD kids who need fun now now now! Who IMDHO aren't the best choice of party mage in the first place.

Unless you were starting at a higher level, it could take months to, in your own words, have fun. Is having someone not wanting to sit and watch everyone else having fun for months while they wait their turn a sign of ADD?

Would it be possible for everyone to be a wee bit less insulting towards those they disagree with here?

 

[Umbran]

monte raises a bunch of really interesting points, however I wonder about how hs proposed changes would affect the "feel" of the spellcasters. On a certain level it seems like what he's suggesting would make the activity of playing a spellcaster be more akin to playing a fighter.

I think I have to agree with this. If the disciplines are to be effective most of the time, this does sound close to equivalent to "Replace armor and sword with a couple disciplines, replace a couple combat feats with a couple of spells".

I don't want a wizard who can whip out the same exact attacks and defense every single time, and have them be reliable and effective. If I want that, I'll play a fighter. Part of the point of having different classes is having radically different play experiences and tactics.

Yes, a resource-bound wizard can sometimes end up with somewhat less input in a particular encounter, but that's because he had loads of input at some earlier time. They had their time of spotlight, now it can be someone else's turn. Really, that's what it comes down to, in the end - taking turns. Supposedly, we learned how to keep having fun while taking turns back in kindergarten.

 

[der_kluge]

I disagree with the problem and the solution. If I were writing 4e, I would dial back the spells per day. I'm still amazed that clerics get as many spells as they do.

I'm not advocating a return to 1 hp wizards with a dagger, though. I like a lot of changes in 3e. Spells flying everywhere is perhaps not one of them.

Did you, in fact, read the article? That's not what Monte was suggesting at all. There would still be spells, but what he is suggesting are for wizards to have lesser effects which make them actually playable in combat situations. His solution isn't to give them a crapload of spells, but rather alter the makeup of the abilities so that the action could continue on without the need for having to stop and rest - an idea I'm definitely in favor of.

 

[Nellisir]

It seems that their design principle has gone from making characters for players who are long term planners who can delay gratification to ADD kids who need fun now now now! Who IMDHO aren't the best choice of party mage in the first place.

As a 34-year old ADD "kid" who likes to be involved in encounters, and not twiddly my thumbs on the sideline, I can say that I made a pretty darned good party mage. Smart spell choice & use made me (in the DM's opinion) the toughest character in the party, despite being 1-2 levels lower.

 

[Nellisir]

I think I have to agree with this. If the disciplines are to be effective most of the time, this does sound close to equivalent to "Replace armor and sword with a couple disciplines, replace a couple combat feats with a couple of spells".

I don't want a wizard who can whip out the same exact attacks and defense every single time, and have them be reliable and effective. If I want that, I'll play a fighter. Part of the point of having different classes is having radically different play experiences and tactics.

I'm strongly reminded of Monte's AE witch - limited spell choice with a number of "witchery" powers to choose from.

 

[Papewaio of The Org]

Unless you were starting at a higher level, it could take months to, in your own words, have fun. Is having someone not wanting to sit and watch everyone else having fun for months while they wait their turn a sign of ADD?

Would it be possible for everyone to be a wee bit less insulting towards those they disagree with here?

Actually my point is that pleasure and fun are two different things. So pleasure is eating a chocolate bar, fun is the feeling of joy you get from say a good weights session. One is immediate and fleeting the other requires work and sweat. Pleasure is the immediate joy of spell use, and yes I do remember how it is when you first hit 5th level and those pesky orcs become bbq. Fun is the long term sense of achievement as your character becomes more powerful, this sense of achievement is often heightened by the difficulty in getting there. For instance I'm sure you have felt more of an achievement nuturing a character from 1st to 5th then making a character up who starts at 10th level.

The differences in power at different parts of the campaign arc and how the party interacts from fighters being the big brothers to the mages leading the show later on kept party dynamics interesting. Pour in to much equality and make everything equal means everyone can do everything with a bit of variation... essentially the largest variation becomes the name of the class not the capacity for differences.

Now the ability to have a player-character that has to think to survive at the beginning has multiple effects. One is as mention the delayed reward ability, this is one side of being a high achiever which is a useful ability in intelligence... and unlike fighters where you don't need to be burly to play a barbarian, a bit of intelligence does magnify the power curve of a magic hurler. Also in the beginning arc of a campaign the fighter types look after the weaker ones... this can build up a trust relationship which paysback later on. Another bonus with having a limited supply of spells is tension in the short term. If a battle is too easy it isn't remember as vividly as the encounters that were far closer to life and death, having too many spells slides it from vivid to mundane if not managed carefully.

Long term there is a sense of achievement in nuturing a relatively weak starting character in to something as powerful as a 20th level arcane caster. Your options have opened up, your power has no near equivalent you feel like you might actually have achieved something with that character. Make it too easy and it isn't that sweet.

So for the long term player it is actually more satisfying to play a character that has challenges.