Another New Magic System

[DreamChaser]

Actually, with the changes to the "hits" and rereading to discover that a "1" was always a failure regardless of what the total came up to, I'm liking this system more. I think that a 5% fixed chance is probably good. Making it 10% with a feat to reduce it makes that feat too much of a must have. Every caster will take it.

I like what you did with armor, and the ability to cast spells more slowly for a bonus. The way you changed the "hits" makes the system less prone to the spiral of degeneration.

More Questions:
Wizards, clerics, & druids--do they lose their spells when they cast them? This is a major issue because...

if they do: they are weakened horribly by this system, since a 5th level wizard with a high intelligence would have 14 spells each day, that he had a chance of failure with.

if they don't: they are strengthened all out of proportion with sorcerers because they essentially choose a repertoire of 14 spells each day while a sorcerer is limited to a fixed repertoire of 12. Both can cast forever, but the wizard's versatility blows the small bonus that a sorcerer gains out of the water.

What about multiclassed casters? Do they have a seperate magic modifier (this should be base casting bonus or BCB) for each class or is it one total?

DC

 

[Aazenius]

Actually, with the changes to the "hits" and rereading to discover that a "1" was always a failure regardless of what the total came up to, I'm liking this system more. I think that a 5% fixed chance is probably good. Making it 10% with a feat to reduce it makes that feat too much of a must have. Every caster will take it.

The Feat is optional. But you are right, all casters would take it.

More Questions:
Wizards, clerics, & druids--do they lose their spells when they cast them? This is a major issue because...

if they do: they are weakened horribly by this system, since a 5th level wizard with a high intelligence would have 14 spells each day, that he had a chance of failure with.

if they don't: they are strengthened all out of proportion with sorcerers because they essentially choose a repertoire of 14 spells each day while a sorcerer is limited to a fixed repertoire of 12. Both can cast forever, but the wizard's versatility blows the small bonus that a sorcerer gains out of the water.

No caster class loses any spells when they cast them. We could increase the sorcerer's bonus to +1 at 1st level, and +1 every other level, so level 3,5,7, etc. This may make them a bit powerful when it comes to meta magic though, and so I would urge caution in that area.

What about multiclassed casters? Do they have a seperate magic modifier (this should be base casting bonus or BCB) for each class or is it one total?

I'm not sure what is best for the system. 1) combine them into one total, or 2) keep all classes seperate. Magic is not similar to melee fighting, so combining them into one total doesn't make a whole lot of sense. It is probably best to keep the classes seperate.

 

[DreamChaser]

With this system, then, there is no reason to ever play a sorcerer. A wizard will always be the better choice.

A wizard gets:
<> a new assortment of spells each day, the total number of which is greater (on average) than the fixed spells known of the sorcerer
<> a prime stat that matches many of the skills they use (Int vs. Cha)
<> bonus feats.

A sorcerer gets:
<> simple weapons
<> a scaling bonus to caster checks, which makes them better at metamagic feats but they will have fewer of them than a wizard since they have no bonus feats.

This hardly seems fair. The sorcerer class is made obsolete by this system.

Just a concern.

DC

 

[Aazenius]

With this system, then, there is no reason to ever play a sorcerer. A wizard will always be the better choice.

A wizard gets:
<> a new assortment of spells each day, the total number of which is greater (on average) than the fixed spells known of the sorcerer
<> a prime stat that matches many of the skills they use (Int vs. Cha)
<> bonus feats.

A sorcerer gets:
<> simple weapons
<> a scaling bonus to caster checks, which makes them better at metamagic feats but they will have fewer of them than a wizard since they have no bonus feats.

This hardly seems fair. The sorcerer class is made obsolete by this system.

Just a concern.

DC

This is also a concern in normal D&D magic rules. That is why there are 101 different sorcerer variants popping up from time to time. If a DM allows their characters to use the Spell Point system, or the Recharge Magic system from UA, it's no different then what I have done here. Only I think what I've done is bring some of that under control. (I hope) A wizard under those systems is clearly the better choice over a sorcerer.

I feel that what I've done, by giving the Sorcerer a greater chance at not "Failing" their magic roll, keeps them from getting fatigued as quickly as a wizard, and allows them to experiment more with meta magic feats (should they take them).

I hardly think the Sorcerer is made obsolete by this system. Perhaps, an alternate rule would be that Sorcerers only fail on a natural 1, while all the other classes fail on a natural 1 or 2.

 

[Nellisir]

Just a thought; haven't worked through the ramifications -- you could take a trick from the melee attacks, and add a penalty to repeated spells; i.e., wizards increase the DC of a spell by +1 (or +2) each time they cast it after the first.

Sorcerers either don't have the penalty or have a lesser penalty.

This preserves the sorcerer's role (multiple castings of limited spells), and helps keep the multiple castings down. The wiz. can't cast improved invisibility all day because, even if he's lucky on the die rolls, the DC will eventually climb out of reach...but he's not penalized for casting magic missle.

Just a thought.
Nell.

 

[Goblyn]

I like your approach here. There are a couple of valid concerns I see as posted here by others, but they are easily addressed.

One thing that sems tacked on, though. The 'hits' and the fatigue. If the numbers are really easy to hit, even at DC 15+caster level, maybe it would be fitting that failure be brutal. Could they result instead in the caster taking subdual damage, ability damage, or something?

Ability damage may be going a bit far, but I'd consider maybe 1d6 Subdual(wait it's called non-lethal now, isn't it?) damage per spell level on a failure. A failed level 2 spell would result in 2d6 Nonlethal damage which may, on its own, knock out the caster. Would this be too much?

I'm trying to think of something that would be usable at higher levels as well.


Of course, using that rule, liches would rock and roll the best and the worst.

Meandering thoughts.

 

[Aazenius]

I like your approach here. There are a couple of valid concerns I see as posted here by others, but they are easily addressed.

One thing that sems tacked on, though. The 'hits' and the fatigue. If the numbers are really easy to hit, even at DC 15+caster level, maybe it would be fitting that failure be brutal. Could they result instead in the caster taking subdual damage, ability damage, or something?

Ability damage may be going a bit far, but I'd consider maybe 1d6 Subdual(wait it's called non-lethal now, isn't it?) damage per spell level on a failure. A failed level 2 spell would result in 2d6 Nonlethal damage which may, on its own, knock out the caster. Would this be too much?

I'm trying to think of something that would be usable at higher levels as well.


Of course, using that rule, liches would rock and roll the best and the worst.

Meandering thoughts.

I didn't even consider liches when creating these rules. Under these rules, a caster becomes fatigued, exhausted, and then falls unconscious. Undead are immune to fatigue. This presents a problem. However, let us make a variant rule here and now. Undead are immune to Physical fatigue, but Liches are still prone to mental fatigue, which is what this system uses. So while his body will never tire, his mind will become clouded and confused if he fails his caster checks.

I tried using DC 15 + caster level of spell + meta magic feats, and the bard I DM for couldn't even get a spell off. He was failing a lot and getting pretty frustrated. So we lowered it to 10. It is possible to fail even with a DC 10 instead of DC 15, just not as often.

Originally if the characters rolled a 1, they did take 1d6 per spell level (not caster level) in subdual damage. I explained to my players that the magic had not gone as they planned and exploded in a little bit of feedback. They seemed fine with that. But, then I realized they are getting double penalized. They are taking hits (which will cause mental fatigue) and they are taking subdual damage. I decided to scrap the subdual damage. Plus I want to keep this system someone streamlined. So for now, the only penalty is a good chance of becoming fatigued pretty quick if you start rolling 1's or 2's.

 

[Aazenius]

Just a thought; haven't worked through the ramifications -- you could take a trick from the melee attacks, and add a penalty to repeated spells; i.e., wizards increase the DC of a spell by +1 (or +2) each time they cast it after the first.

Sorcerers either don't have the penalty or have a lesser penalty.

This preserves the sorcerer's role (multiple castings of limited spells), and helps keep the multiple castings down. The wiz. can't cast improved invisibility all day because, even if he's lucky on the die rolls, the DC will eventually climb out of reach...but he's not penalized for casting magic missle.

Just a thought.
Nell.

That is an interesting idea. One concern I have with that, is the amount of record keeping involved. Or does it only apply when the same spell is cast over and over within that battle. Does it carry over to other battles in the day?

Under this system a Wizard can cast the same spell over and over all day long, just as a Sorcerer, only a Wizard gets free meta magic feats. So why would anyone play a Sorcerer?

Should we decide that 1) Sorcerers only fail on a natural 1 (and their is no feat that ever improves a casters ability to lower their casting failure to a 1. This makes the other casters still have a 5% higher chance at failing a spell then a sorcerer.

and 2) Sorcerers gain a +1 inherent magic bonus to their Caster modifier every other level starting at level 1.

This will make them less likely to fail, and able to cast spells longer, and more powerful then a wizard of the same level. A level 14 Wizard (Int 24) will have a +21 Caster modifier, while a level 14 Sorcerer (Cha 24) will have a +28 Caster modifier.

 

[DreamChaser]

This is also a concern in normal D&D magic rules. That is why there are 101 different sorcerer variants popping up from time to time.

No it isn't. Each day, a 5th level wizard can cast 12 spells plus bonuses each day. Period. They must choose them in advance. A sorcerer can cast 14 plus bonus. The 2 extra spells come at the cost of never changing what they are, but having access to all of them.

If a DM allows their characters to use the Spell Point system, or the Recharge Magic system from UA, it's no different then what I have done here.

I agree. But these systems screw the sorcerer too.

I am also of the opinion that the large numbers of varient sorcerers have less to do with power (I firmly believe along with many others that the two classes are about equal) and more to do with a lack of flavor on the part of the sorcerer. They aren't different enough from wizards to make it worth a new class.


I really think that this disparity throws the class balance off significantly. If you aren't worried about dropping the sorcerer as a class, then that is cool. Just drop them.

Perhaps giving them the 1 in 20 chance of failure and bonus feats (for the metamagic) would be worth it, but otherwise, I would never play a sorcerer in this system. Whereas now, I refuse to play wizards.

Just my thoughts.

DC

 

[Nellisir]

That is an interesting idea. One concern I have with that, is the amount of record keeping involved. Or does it only apply when the same spell is cast over and over within that battle. Does it carry over to other battles in the day?

I was thinking per day, but you could run it per encounter without a problem.

I favor failed castings doing non-lethal damage over fatigue/exhaustion, but I'm going to put more emphasis on non-lethal damage in my next game anyways.

Cheers
Nell.