• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Haste spell

What do you think about the idea for a Haste warmup time?

  • Awesome idea! It would make the spell far more a question of tactics.

    Votes: 2 3.3%
  • Good idea but needs to be tweaked...

    Votes: 10 16.7%
  • Crap, leave haste as it is.

    Votes: 44 73.3%
  • Mhh, still way too powerful.

    Votes: 4 6.7%

Simulacrum

First Post
I came across this idea (from a very intelligent and experienced gamer whom I trust). First I thought it to be funny, but after some thought I see that it has some potential without changing the spell too much:
Give haste a *onset* time. --> meaning that the spell needs a a full round to speed you up!
> The haste spell itself could be made a free action (like the FR spell Spell Enhancer) so that you wouldn't loose a whole round doing effectively nothing.
After the next round Haste would take effect.
(duration starts running after the warmup!)
It would still be an awesome spell and yet it wouldn't be that overused and overpowered in most situations, it would also create the need for some tactics to employ it properly, that is a good option I think and removes the need to bump it up a level or change the effects.
-
What do you think about it? Is that a good idea?
-
Think about it, it's not that weird as it sounds at first. I'll playtest the hell out of it the next two weeks. The guy who had the idea said it solved all the problems that the spell threw up.
I'll have to find out for myself as I'm not in his group.

Note: I edited the description as most people got it horribly wrong thanx to my bad english.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

That basically makes in an ambush only spell. And in the realm of D&d that frequently means NPC only. I can understand delaying it till the next round so it sin't almost cast for free, but a 2-3 round delay is too big of a hit and is counter intutitve to how basically every other spell in the game works.
 

Shard O'Glase said:
That basically makes in an ambush only spell. And in the realm of D&d that frequently means NPC only. I can understand delaying it till the next round so it sin't almost cast for free, but a 2-3 round delay is too big of a hit and is counter intutitve to how basically every other spell in the game works.

baah counter intuitive. What does that mean? As long as it doesnt interferes with the game mechanics that is just an excuse or fear to implement ideas that SHOULD be in the game.
Creating deeper tactics is a damn good idea and no way something like counter intuitive. While thinking about that idea I reasoned with me and realized that I was missing exactly those things in the game.
-
3 rounds is way too much, this I said only to prevent it being said / suggested by anyone else.
1-2 rounds is perfect. I disagree that this makes it an pure ambush spell thouugh.
 

I don't think this is a good idea, and I do think that it makes haste more of an ambush spell (even if not ambush-only).

A lot of high-level encounters only last two rounds, so you effectively cut haste's utility in half by making it take a round to take effect. I think a better, and simpler, solution is to take away the +4 AC bonus.
 

the Jester said:
I don't think this is a good idea, and I do think that it makes haste more of an ambush spell (even if not ambush-only).

A lot of high-level encounters only last two rounds, so you effectively cut haste's utility in half by making it take a round to take effect. I think a better, and simpler, solution is to take away the +4 AC bonus.

1. The spell is not only for high level encounters. In fact you get it while start fighting CR 5 creatures. Not even mid level.
2. The two round encounter thing is a problem mainly created by the HASTE spell. So this argument holds not much water, because there is no way that a non twinked 6th or 7th level party can wipe out a group of 12 ogres led by a Ogremage in 2 rounds.
NOCHANCE.

Do not overlook the issues that this idea is trying to deal with.

Forcing PC's and NPC's alike to use tactics is a good thing and not a counter intuitive option...
 

2. If those are standard MM ogres, against a balanced 6th or 7th level party, my expectation is that, unless the ogres are quite spread out, the only villain left alive by the end of round 2 will be the ogre mage--even without Haste. Fireball and Confusion are ideal for that kind of situation.

Haste is certainly not solely responsible for the short duration of high level combats. I recently tossed a sixth level party (6 members) against a half fiend ogre barbarian 4. The ogre's hundred+ hit points lasted him about three rounds. IIRC, only the party's wizard was hasted (and he didn't do too much--it was the archers who cut the ogre down to size).

As to the idea itself, I think it would ruin the spell. It's the first rounds of most D&D combats which are the most decisive. If a PC needs to spend the first round casting haste in order to get any use out of it (thereby effectively doing nothing in the first round of combat) the opportunity cost of casting the spell increases very very dramatically. (At the moment, there is little to no opportunity cost for casting it because the wizard is able to attempt another spell in the extra partial action). If it didn't take effect until the third round of combat (which is usually the last round of combat IME), then the caster essentially traded a standard action in the critical first round of combat for an extra partial action in the final round of combat (when the action will make less difference to the outcome)--a net gain of 0 actions. At a two round onset time, I think that Haste would not only be useless in most situations; casting it would actually be counterproductive.

A single round onset time would be more useful (netting one extra partial action in the above example) but still would suffer from the opportunity cost aspect (because the round given up is the first round when the caster has the possibility of incapacitating foes before they attack at all in return for extra actions in the second and third rounds which are important but less decisive).

Simulacrum said:
2. The two round encounter thing is a problem mainly created by the HASTE spell. So this argument holds not much water, because there is no way that a non twinked 6th or 7th level party can wipe out a group of 12 ogres led by a Ogremage in 2 rounds.
NOCHANCE.

Do not overlook the issues that this idea is trying to deal with.

Forcing PC's and NPC's alike to use tactics is a good thing and not a counter intuitive option...
 

Elder-Basilisk said:
2. If those are standard MM ogres, against a balanced 6th or 7th level party, my expectation is that, unless the ogres are quite spread out, the only villain left alive by the end of round 2 will be the ogre mage--even without Haste. Fireball and Confusion are ideal for that kind of situation.

Haste is certainly not solely responsible for the short duration of high level combats. I recently tossed a sixth level party (6 members) against a half fiend ogre barbarian 4. The ogre's hundred+ hit points lasted him about three rounds. IIRC, only the party's wizard was hasted (and he didn't do too much--it was the archers who cut the ogre down to size).

As to the idea itself, I think it would ruin the spell. It's the first rounds of most D&D combats which are the most decisive. If a PC needs to spend the first round casting haste in order to get any use out of it (thereby effectively doing nothing in the first round of combat) the opportunity cost of casting the spell increases very very dramatically. (At the moment, there is little to no opportunity cost for casting it because the wizard is able to attempt another spell in the extra partial action). If it didn't take effect until the third round of combat (which is usually the last round of combat IME), then the caster essentially traded a standard action in the critical first round of combat for an extra partial action in the final round of combat (when the action will make less difference to the outcome)--a net gain of 0 actions. At a two round onset time, I think that Haste would not only be useless in most situations; casting it would actually be counterproductive.

A single round onset time would be more useful (netting one extra partial action in the above example) but still would suffer from the opportunity cost aspect (because the round given up is the first round when the caster has the possibility of incapacitating foes before they attack at all in return for extra actions in the second and third rounds which are important but less decisive).


Ok I don't know what sort of D&D you guys are playing but 12 Ogres and an Ogremage on short distance can actually kill a normal 6th level party in 3 to 4 rounds if you take advantage of the rules.
+ I sorta should have given a few possible ideas to balance out the haste delay.

1. Haste could be made a free action spell like Spell Enhancer from the FR books. That would allow you to cast a second spell right after Haste and not losing the round to wait.
2. As I understood my pal it was meant that after the round of casting and skiping the next round Haste takes effect immidiately.
This means that you lose only one round in total not three as most seem to understand.
The point was too make Haste less of a spell that opens every single spellcaster combat.
 

Simulacrum said:


baah counter intuitive. What does that mean? As long as it doesnt interferes with the game mechanics that is just an excuse or fear to implement ideas that SHOULD be in the game.
Creating deeper tactics is a damn good idea and no way something like counter intuitive. While thinking about that idea I reasoned with me and realized that I was missing exactly those things in the game.
-

baah, putting things into the game just because you think they should be there can be a bad idea. And having coutner intuituve spells is a bad thing IMO, because it throws off the thematic and flavor elements of the magic system making it seem less a part of the world your running in.
 

Shard O'Glase said:


baah, putting things into the game just because you think they should be there can be a bad idea. And having coutner intuituve spells is a bad thing IMO, because it throws off the thematic and flavor elements of the magic system making it seem less a part of the world your running in.

Sorry, so much as I respect your opinion I have to say that I'm sorry but your argument is lacking logic. Also I fear it just doesnt holds much water when you look at spells like spell enhancer (FR)
that is given you as a free action or spells that simply have several rounds of of casting time..I don't see any counter intuitiveness.
-
Please note I changed / edited the spelldesctiption for better understanding as most people got it horribly wrong.
 

Simulacrum said:
Ok I don't know what sort of D&D you guys are playing but 12 Ogres and an Ogremage on short distance can actually kill a normal 6th level party in 3 to 4 rounds if you take advantage of the rules.

Well it would depend on a lot of things. If the ogres are clumped together and the PCs get the initiative or if the combat starts at long distance and the ogres stay together they should all die within 2 rounds (given a lvl 6-7 arcane caster with fireball, Icy Burst or something similar).

If the ogres start out spread out and within melee range of the PCs, using longspears (and traded their weapon focus: greatclub for large and in charge), and won the initiative, then the PCs are probably mostly history by the end of round 2. Either way, the combat will probably be mostly over by round 3.

+ I sorta should have given a few possible ideas to balance out the haste delay.

1. Haste could be made a free action spell like Spell Enhancer from the FR books. That would allow you to cast a second spell right after Haste and not losing the round to wait.
2. As I understood my pal it was meant that after the round of casting and skiping the next round Haste takes effect immidiately.
This means that you lose only one round in total not three as most seem to understand.
The point was too make Haste less of a spell that opens every single spellcaster combat.

I don't think you're going to accomplish this goal with your plan. If you adopt #1, you really haven't changed haste very much at all until PCs hit high levels (although you've made it better for arcane spellcasters who wear armor since they don't lose an action if the spell fails). The difference between a standard action to cast but you get an extra partial action and cast as a free action and use your standard action to do something else is only significant in that you can't also cast a quickened spell in the round you cast haste as a free action. (Assuming that, like Feather Fall, it counts against the number of free actions a character can take in a round.)

If you adopt a one round delay and don't make it a free action, Haste is even more of an advantage in an ambush situation since the ambusher has haste active in the surprise round or at worst casts it in the surprise round and then takes an extra action in round 1 while the ambushed can only take one action. So, within the first two rounds, the ambusher has taken two actions (other than casting haste) but the ambushed character has only cast haste. In normal D&D, the ambusher casts haste in the surprise round and has three actions other than casting haste by the end of round 1. The ambushed character, probably casts haste in the first round and then does something else. 2-0 or 3-1. By the end of the next round, the score of non-haste actions is 4-2 or 5-3. The change advantages the ambusher, making it more of a factor who casts haste first not less of a factor.

And, assuming that a single spell is not likely to decide the spellcaster combat, haste is even more likely to start every spellcaster combat in the delay version. Using the normal version, a wizard might refrain from casting it in round 1 if an encounter looks easy and it's unnecesary (wizards don't have unlimited haste-casting capacity). If the fight turns out to be tougher, the wizard can cast it in round 2 and immediately start working to help his party. On the other hand, the delay version means that you need to know in round 1 whether or not you'll need haste in round 2. So, parties are more likely to err on the side of caution and cast haste so that they'll have it if they need it rather than simply being able to cast it if they need it. (It's like going on a camping trip--if you're unable to get potable water at the camp site, you'll bring more than you need just in case but if the water at the camp site is potable, you'll only take what you need).
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top