BAB + Int mod?

[tomtill]

"charm person" vs. a static save.

Doesn't that imply a roll to see if it works?

So, if the caster rolls an attack roll for "charm person" does he use the "ranged touch attack" of tradition (for spells that required an attack roll)?

The stats for the Spined Devil 4E preview "+9 Dex vs Ref" suggest that there are now more choices than melee (Str bonus) and ranged (Dex bonus).

One possibility is that the caster of "charm person" uses BAB + the caster class primary ability modifer vs his opponent's Will.

BAB + Int mod
BAB + Wis mod
BAB + Cha mod

I like this; to me it better represents how good a caster is at casting spells, which is, after all, what we want to measure.

Are there any other data out there about this?

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

The caster rolls, but BAB won't apply except appropriate (eg ranged attack spells). BAB has nothing to do with casting Charm Person; I expect the roll is based on caster level instead.

 

[Anthtriel]

The most obvious route would be to make the attribute used dependant on the specific power (or spell) used, regardless of class.

So you could have Charming rely on Charisma, Disable Spells on Intelligence, Rays on Dexterity and Scrying on Wisdom. Or for Fighter-Types: Smashy moves rely on strength, precise moves on dexterity, complicated moves on dexterity and feints on charisma.

This would do much to allow for more varied character builds, and to avoid having dump stats.

 

[Aage]

On a somewhat unrelated note; Let's say there are "tactical insight" abilities, most likely for fighter/warlord. They could perhaps be BAB + Int

 

[gothmaugCC]

Easiest method will be for them to implement a MAB or magic attack bonus for casting classes. You'd use you MAB + relevant stat bonus for all your spells (ie Int for wizards, wis for clerics, etc).

Since we know they are tossing the vancian system, they could go a step further and use MAB to determine what level spells you can cast. For example, a MAB of +10 might get you access to 10th level spells or something like that.

Would make it easier when multiclassing, just add your total MAB together to determine what level spells you can cast, especially now that there are 25 levels of spells, or some such thing

 

[tomtill]

On a somewhat unrelated note; Let's say there are "tactical insight" abilities, most likely for fighter/warlord. They could perhaps be BAB + Int

Yes, I agree this is the more likely reason for the distinction of +9 Dex vs. Ref for the Spined Devil ranged attack. Not spells, but other special attacks that use an ability score other than Str and Dex.

The trouble with BAB for spells is what to do about multiclassing. Doesn't seems right that a 5th level fighter/ 1st level magic user should get to use his BAB. CL makes more sense in that regard. I was thinking in the 3E mindset where there are only spells or spell-like abilities and melee and ranged attacks, so it wasn't clear why the distinction was made for the ranged attack using Dex.

 

[Exen Trik]

BAB+Int isn't something I'd expect to see in most spells. However, a spell that involved a weapon being wielded telekinetically like Mordenkainen's Sword could use it, since it can draw on both the users mental ability and martial understanding. Also, a weapon made of pure, malleable arcane energy could be modified by Int, or any other kind of magical force that is more wielded than cast.

...Dangit, now I want to write up some new weapons and spells. But I want to do it for 4e. :/

Ah well, I won't let not having the rules stop me from that. To the drawing board!
*flies away*

 

[I'm A Banana]

Easiest method will be for them to implement a MAB or magic attack bonus for casting classes. You'd use you MAB + relevant stat bonus for all your spells (ie Int for wizards, wis for clerics, etc).

Since we know they are tossing the vancian system, they could go a step further and use MAB to determine what level spells you can cast. For example, a MAB of +10 might get you access to 10th level spells or something like that.

Would make it easier when multiclassing, just add your total MAB together to determine what level spells you can cast, especially now that there are 25 levels of spells, or some such thing

You could ALMOST do this with 3e, if you look at the rate that the various classes earned spells. Sorcs/Wiz/Cleric at =Full, Bards = Mid, Paladins/Rangers = Low. There were just a few places (like the rogue or the fighter) where you'd need to just add it onto them. FFZ took this approach. It works like a charm.

Basically, Caster Level is this already, but they need to make Caster Level a universal ability for all characters, and revise the spells so that you don't need full power to be effective. I think they're doing this, so I think "weak casters" will be a very viable character option, whereas before, they took a bit of kludging.

 

[Exen Trik]

Basically, Caster Level is this already, but they need to make Caster Level a universal ability for all characters, and revise the spells so that you don't need full power to be effective. I think they're doing this, so I think "weak casters" will be a very viable character option, whereas before, they took a bit of kludging.

Ah yes, I had a similar thing with that project of mine, making a mirror of BAB called BCL (base caster level). But for the half casters like bard, I had to up the medium rate to 1, 2, 2, 3, 4, 5, 5, 6, etc, else 1st level casters couldn't cast, and classes with medium BAB and BCL would be too uneven over their levels.

And on a slight tangent, are you planning on converting FFZ to 4e? I've found your best ideas to be edition or even system independent, but the fiddly bits would need to be reinterpreted. Myself, 4e seems to solve nearly every problem I had mechanically. It presents a couple problems too, but I'll be using it nonetheless.

 

[I'm A Banana]

And on a slight tangent, are you planning on converting FFZ to 4e? I've found your best ideas to be edition or even system independent, but the fiddly bits would need to be reinterpreted. Myself, 4e seems to solve nearly every problem I had mechanically. It presents a couple problems too, but I'll be using it nonetheless.

Everything I've seen from 4e so far is going to work better with FFZ than 3e, and a lot of things are kind of the same direction I wanteded to take the game in (faster play, clearer mechanics, etc.). In some cases, it's like they swiped my idea almost exactly.

So HECK YES!

Of course, by best ideas will remain intact. The initiative system, the limit system, the core of the storytelling mechanics, those don't change, because they address some things that are pretty FF specific.

But I'll probably kill the PHB and take it's stuff.