Killing a Wizard is Easy... if you know how.

[Empath Negative]

Perhaps... eliminate spell progression entirely?

You only gain spells based on high intellect, wisdom, and so forth... this would require wizards and sorcerers to become MUCH more dependent on scrolls, potions, wands, staves, rods, and so forth.

Which actually sounds about right...

This situation might be ideal for utilizing reserve Feats.


Wizards would still have access to extremely powerful spells, making their round to round interactions less "spell" dependent and more lesser effect dependent.


Think of it like this...

Let's say we could numerically quantify the experience of the classes.

Something ideal might read like:

Fighter: 3,3,5,5,5,3,3,3,3,3,4,4,4,3,3,3,4,5,5

Wizard: 2,2,2,3,3,8,2,2,3,3,4,9,2,2,3,8,2,2,9



The Fighter has a higher round to round "experience", but never reaches the same pinnacles as the Wizard.. but also never reaches the same lows.

 

[Sekhmet]

Something ideal might read like:

Fighter: 3,3,5,5,5,3,3,3,3,3,4,4,4,3,3,3,4,5,5

Wizard: 2,2,2,3,3,8,2,2,3,3,4,9,2,2,3,8,2,2,9



The Fighter has a higher round to round "experience", but never reaches the same pinnacles as the Wizard.. but also never reaches the same lows.

I think in this scenario, the Wizard would only ever get to participate in combats very infrequently. Most combats are over in the first three to four rounds, and this system wouldn't allow for "slow" classes to have any real interaction with combat.

Perhaps loosening up the restrictions on Quicken Spell*, allowing it to work as Spontaneous Quicken, and having multiple round casting times be more normal would even it out, without penalizing or rewarding anyone.
An idea might be 1st, 2nd, and 3rd level spells being 1 round, 4th, 5th, and 6th level spells being 2 rounds, and 7th, 8th, and 9th level spells being 3 rounds. Or 1st and 2nd being 1 standard action, 3rd and 4th being 1 round, 5th and 6th being 1 round and 1 standard action, etc...
As long as you don't go over 4 rounds, your wizard should still be able to contribute to every combat without feeling left out, and the party will feel like they're doing more.
This would give even more reason to be a party buffing wizard, rather than a controller, but no one has ever complained that their BuffStick was OP.

*Quicken would be usable 3/day, and reduce any spell's casting time to 1 swift action, as long as their casting time falls within the normal limits of that level. IE: using the first example casting times, it could reduce a 9th level spell of 3 rounds down to 1 swift action, but any 9th level spell with an unmodified casting time of more than 3 rounds would not be a candidate for Quicken.

 

[Empath Negative]

I think in this scenario, the Wizard would only ever get to participate in combats very infrequently. Most combats are over in the first three to four rounds, and this system wouldn't allow for "slow" classes to have any real interaction with combat.

Perhaps loosening up the restrictions on Quicken Spell*, allowing it to work as Spontaneous Quicken, and having multiple round casting times be more normal would even it out, without penalizing or rewarding anyone.
An idea might be 1st, 2nd, and 3rd level spells being 1 round, 4th, 5th, and 6th level spells being 2 rounds, and 7th, 8th, and 9th level spells being 3 rounds. Or 1st and 2nd being 1 standard action, 3rd and 4th being 1 round, 5th and 6th being 1 round and 1 standard action, etc...
As long as you don't go over 4 rounds, your wizard should still be able to contribute to every combat without feeling left out, and the party will feel like they're doing more.
This would give even more reason to be a party buffing wizard, rather than a controller, but no one has ever complained that their BuffStick was OP.

*Quicken would be usable 3/day, and reduce any spell's casting time to 1 swift action, as long as their casting time falls within the normal limits of that level. IE: using the first example casting times, it could reduce a 9th level spell of 3 rounds down to 1 swift action, but any 9th level spell with an unmodified casting time of more than 3 rounds would not be a candidate for Quicken.

Most combats are over in three or four rounds in the current paradigm... where wizards can conjure the heralds of the gods every other fight... and they can by level 20 hurl fireballs with impunity all day long. Of course, under that system, fights wouldn't last especially long.

In the system I'm proposing spells become a much more strategic resource because you just don't have many of them, you have potent lesser effects... but you can't at level 20 with 28 intelligence (which isn't exactly hard)... summon an engine of destruction from the bowels of hell five times per day....

 

[Eldritch_Lord]

My tactical suggestions:
1) After every rest, ask the wizard player for a copy of his written list of memorized spells. You'll have a copy behind the DM screen. That will reduce the wizard's versatility.
2) Enforce spell components, verbal, and somatic gestures. No spell casting while swimming, bound and tied, silenced, etc.

7) Use opponents who are even more powerful than EL+4, but have a special weakness. i.e. an EL+10 opponent, who can be defeated by a special weapon wielded by one of the non-wizard characters. The other party members have to help distract and defend the wielder while the wielder destroys the BBEG.

Points 1 and 2 aren't countermeasures for casters, they're countermeasures for cheaters. If you have players routinely ignore components, swap memorized spells, and similar, your problem there is the players, not the class.

Regarding point 7: currently, most challenging fights are left up to the wizard to defeat, with the other party members doing whatever until then. If you replace "special weapon wielded by one of the non-wizard characters" with "spell wielded by one of the wizard characters," that brings us back to exactly the power and spotlight problems that currently exist, so why would that fix anything?

 

[James the Newbie]

Personaly I think the best way to improve the fighter and the monk is to add DR to the fighter every other level on top of DR from any other souse and add DR at every level past 5th for the monk

This results in fighters being good at low levels (like seems to be intended) and monks getting better as the game progresses (As already works)

The other one is to literally double non casting classes hit die and BAB and then increase the EL of everything. Your then running a high level campaign where close quarters experts, really are that. also give classes like ranger and bard 1.5 HD and BAB

Not sure if either of these effectively work, I just wanted to give you guys something to mull over maybe

 

[rgard]

Yes, but in the Star Wars RPG, if you're not a force user, you are massively outclassed.

Or so I hear.

Agreed, but that didn't stop my players from playing Fringers, Nobles, Scoundrels, Soldiers, Scouts, and Tech Specialists.

I didn't understand their choices. Whenever I played in somebody else's campaign, I'd play a Jedi Guardian. For me there wasn't much point if my character wasn't cutting off limbs with a light sabre.

 

[Endur]

Points 1 and 2 aren't countermeasures for casters, they're countermeasures for cheaters. If you have players routinely ignore components, swap memorized spells, and similar, your problem there is the players, not the class.

I see it as an issue of accounting. If I force the player to give me a copy of his memorized spells every time he rests, its likely the spell list will be nearly identical every time. On the other hand, if he only writes his spell list down one time, he is more likely to make changes.

With regards to material components, some players hand wave and assume they have components without actually checking.

Regarding point 7: currently, most challenging fights are left up to the wizard to defeat, with the other party members doing whatever until then. If you replace "special weapon wielded by one of the non-wizard characters" with "spell wielded by one of the wizard characters," that brings us back to exactly the power and spotlight problems that currently exist, so why would that fix anything?

In my experience, clerics are more powerful than wizards. But I usually don't play level 15+, so I miss out on the 8th and 9th level spells. Below level 15, I don't see the wizard as winning most of the challenging fights.

 

[Dandu]

In my experience, clerics are more powerful than wizards. But I usually don't play level 15+, so I miss out on the 8th and 9th level spells. Below level 15, I don't see the wizard as winning most of the challenging fights.

What do you define as "winning"?

 

[RUMBLETiGER]

With regards to material components, some players hand wave and assume they have components without actually checking.

There's a Feat for that. If the DM wants to make it even easier for a caster by giving a free feat, hey, why should the player complain? However, if the DM says the player needs to account for the materials, then that's completely within the rules, and keeps the caster accountable. In a thread about reigning in the Wizard etc, enforcing this aspect of spellcasting is a very fair and balanced way to do so.
My Factotum complains about finding and eating a live spider every time he uses Spider Climb. Gnawing on asphalt he's ok with by now.

What do you define as "winning"?

 

[Endur]

What do you define as "winning"?

Sorry I was referring to the previous poster's comment that he sees most challenging combats being up to the wizard to defeat.