I hope its not just me...

[Belaugured DM]

Ahem,

Hi - I'm the new guy as of a few days ago. I have been lurking but a few things encouraged me to register so I can participate in the general chaos here.

I have recently started running a 4e campaing and something is bothering me however so I thought I would bring it before you all. I really, really, dont know if I like the idea of "at will" spells given the fact it effectivley allows spellcasters (arcane) to have an unending supply of magical goodness at thier fingertips each fight. I really am looking for a way that would allow more of an old school feel of the trade off of having limited power at your fingertips early on for the trade off of massive magical ability at later levels.

I have been wiorking on some systems to try and fix this but I keep getting the impression that I am missing something. So, in short I guess I have 2 questions, 1 - Does anyone else have a problem with unlimited "at will" magic? 2 - Has someone tried to houserule more of an old school flavor regarding magic into thier games?

I will probably be posting what solutions I have come up with shortly after I give them one more look. (I dont want to look like a complete doofus once I do submit them.) Right now I am thinking of either a "Mana pool" system of somethign along the lines of this:

** Disclaimer** - Not originally my idea - I cant locate it again online however so I can attribute credit.

"We're changing the At will, per encounter, and per day spellcasting. For the wizard, sorcerer, druid, and cleric they'll start off being able to cast they're 0 lvl spells at will and 1st lvl spell per day. Preparation for these spells must still take place and when a player wants to swap out prepared spells for new ones, he/she must rest as usual. When the player gains the ability to cast 3rd lvl spells, they are per day as well as his 2nd lvl spells. 1st lvl spells become per encounter and 0 lvl remain at will. When the player gains the ability to cast 5th lvl spells, they are per day as well as his 4th. 3rd and 2nd spells are per encounter and 1st and 0 are at will. When the player reaches the ability to cast 7th lvl spells, they are per day as well as his 6th lvl spells. His 5th, 4th, and 3rd are per encounter, and his 2nd, 1st, and 0 lvl are at will. Lastly when the ability to cast 9th lvl spells, they are per day along with the 8th and 7th. 6th through 4th are per encounter, and 3rd through 0 are at will."

** Again Disclaimer** - Not originally my idea!

In any case let me know any thoughts on this and the above idea if you guys have anything to chime in.

Thanks!

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Hmmmm.

Well, if you haven't played 4e basically as written for a while it may be worth giving it a good spin. It certainly DOES strike you at first as being weird. Things are a good bit different than in 1e/2e (I never did play 3e). However, it plays pretty well, once you just abandon the idea that it is just about the same as older editions.

The problem(s) with the old style spell system are obvious. Your idea might solve them, but the 4e system DOES solve them. So it is really a matter of taste.

One thing you can be pretty sure of though. A complete rewrite of the 4e spell system IS going to be just that, a total rewrite. Once you start down that path, you're going to have to pretty much ditch about 95% of what is in 4e for spell caster powers. They are just not really equivalent to the older spells at all, and because of the way numbers add up precisely in 4e to balance everything it is quite hard to just fudge with it a little bit.

 

[Garthanos]

Hmmmm.

Well, if you haven't played 4e basically as written for a while it may be worth giving it a good spin. It certainly DOES strike you at first as being weird. Things are a good bit different than in 1e/2e (I never did play 3e).

You too, cool ;-)

Original poster.. sounds like you are squashing an idea in to place...
by the way a 5th level power in 4e is tada available at 5th level ;-)

old school magic flavor OH you mean mages doing a whole lot of nothing at low levels except throwing darts or using crossbows till later they become better at stealth than thieves and better at killing things than fighters and make everyone else feel useless ... nyeh I haven't even considered bringing that garbage back in to the game.

No simpathy for that kind of hacking what so ever.

 

[Urizen]

Ahem,

Hi - I'm the new guy as of a few days ago. I have been lurking but a few things encouraged me to register so I can participate in the general chaos here.

I have recently started running a 4e campaing and something is bothering me however so I thought I would bring it before you all. I really, really, dont know if I like the idea of "at will" spells given the fact it effectivley allows spellcasters (arcane) to have an unending supply of magical goodness at thier fingertips each fight. I really am looking for a way that would allow more of an old school feel of the trade off of having limited power at your fingertips early on for the trade off of massive magical ability at later levels.

I have been wiorking on some systems to try and fix this but I keep getting the impression that I am missing something. So, in short I guess I have 2 questions, 1 - Does anyone else have a problem with unlimited "at will" magic? 2 - Has someone tried to houserule more of an old school flavor regarding magic into thier games?

I will probably be posting what solutions I have come up with shortly after I give them one more look. (I dont want to look like a complete doofus once I do submit them.) Right now I am thinking of either a "Mana pool" system of somethign along the lines of this:

** Disclaimer** - Not originally my idea - I cant locate it again online however so I can attribute credit.

"We're changing the At will, per encounter, and per day spellcasting. For the wizard, sorcerer, druid, and cleric they'll start off being able to cast they're 0 lvl spells at will and 1st lvl spell per day. Preparation for these spells must still take place and when a player wants to swap out prepared spells for new ones, he/she must rest as usual. When the player gains the ability to cast 3rd lvl spells, they are per day as well as his 2nd lvl spells. 1st lvl spells become per encounter and 0 lvl remain at will. When the player gains the ability to cast 5th lvl spells, they are per day as well as his 4th. 3rd and 2nd spells are per encounter and 1st and 0 are at will. When the player reaches the ability to cast 7th lvl spells, they are per day as well as his 6th lvl spells. His 5th, 4th, and 3rd are per encounter, and his 2nd, 1st, and 0 lvl are at will. Lastly when the ability to cast 9th lvl spells, they are per day along with the 8th and 7th. 6th through 4th are per encounter, and 3rd through 0 are at will."

** Again Disclaimer** - Not originally my idea!

In any case let me know any thoughts on this and the above idea if you guys have anything to chime in.

Thanks!

IMHO, you really want to be playing 3rd edition/3.5.

One of the main design goals for 4th edition was to do away with the type of magic system I think you are referring to ( unless I'm reading it wrong).

As another poster said, you're essentially have to re-write the entire system for wizards/warlocks, etc.. and even after all that work, I doubt it would balance out with the rest of the classes.

 

[Belaugured DM]

Hmmmm.

Well, if you haven't played 4e basically as written for a while it may be worth giving it a good spin. It certainly DOES strike you at first as being weird. Things are a good bit different than in 1e/2e (I never did play 3e). However, it plays pretty well, once you just abandon the idea that it is just about the same as older editions.

The problem(s) with the old style spell system are obvious. Your idea might solve them, but the 4e system DOES solve them. So it is really a matter of taste.

One thing you can be pretty sure of though. A complete rewrite of the 4e spell system IS going to be just that, a total rewrite. Once you start down that path, you're going to have to pretty much ditch about 95% of what is in 4e for spell caster powers. They are just not really equivalent to the older spells at all, and because of the way numbers add up precisely in 4e to balance everything it is quite hard to just fudge with it a little bit.

Well thats probably true, which is why I am hammering away at it trying to see what will fit. Also hence why I am looking for anyone who may be like minded. I think 4e has potentail but it needs heavy customization to make it fit with what I want out of D&D I suppose. I was a version 1e and 2e guy myself never got to play 3e or 3.5.

old school magic flavor OH you mean mages doing a whole lot of nothing at low levels except throwing darts or using crossbows till later they become better at stealth than thieves and better at killing things than fighters and make everyone else feel useless ... nyeh I haven't even considered bringing that garbage back in to the game.

No simpathy for that kind of hacking what so ever..

Thanks for your opinion is all I will say to that.

IMHO, you really want to be playing 3rd edition/3.5.

One of the main design goals for 4th edition was to do away with the type of magic system I think you are referring to ( unless I'm reading it wrong).

You may have a point. I am finding out today I suppose. I am playing in someone elses 3.5 game bi-weekly on the side to see about it in fact. Learning 3.5 while I work on 4e should be interesteng probably, It may give me some additional ideas or perspective on this whole topic. Like I said I am used to 1e and 2e casters to me that is D&D, your milage may vary of course, but they never seemed to get too out of whack in games I played in.

 

[keterys]

So, does it have to be a daily limit or is an encounter limit palatable? (ie, like no more than 2 magic missiles per encounter vs. 5 per day) Would taking some sort of action to gather power or recharge be something worth mixing in, or not?

You'd need to increase the power of whoever you did this to, so you can consider how you'd want to do that... for example, more encounter powers. Or more at-will powers, but less use of them.

For example, you could say a wizard has 4 at-wills instead of 2, but can only use them once each per encounter. Probably they'd also have to get an extra encounter power of their highest level (but can't be the same as their other power). That's a little more old flavored but keeps them within a 'per encounter' framework rather than making them daily based so you have to rest after an encounter or two.

You are encouraging wizards to use crossbows and such, potentially, when they run out of magic options in a combat. Is that the intended goal? If not, it may be worth being very explicit of the goal - for example, magic missile is _much_ less powerful than it was in previous editions, so infinite magic missile isn't nearly the same as it might once have been. It's something to consider, at any rate.

 

[Piratecat]

For me, a DM making that house rule would pretty much ensure that I'd only play melee classes. Be sure you're willing for other people to do the same if you end up gimping the spell-slingers.

You could try something similar to what the MM does: limit all at-wills to a 5-6 recharge on a d6. That would ensure that the same spell doesn't get cast every round. It might not meet your stated goal of resourcement management, though.

 

[RangerWickett]

You're running the game, I assume. You should ask your players what they'd prefer. Would they rather have the type of wizard who doesn't have much interesting to do at low levels and then steals the spotlight a lot at high levels, or the type of wizard who is on equal footing with the rest of the group throughout the entire campaign?

Despite my own pet peeves in 4e, I'd much prefer to be useful all the time. Plus, wizards still feel magical, since they're performing spooky actions at a distance. Add in ritual magic and you can still keep the 'awesome power at high levels' you want, without having to consign low-level wizards and high-level everyone else to having less fun during combat.

Bear in mind, combat in 4e tends to have more round than in previous editions, so if you only have 3 spells at 1st level, you're going to run out of stuff to do really fast. If you want to keep combat fun for everyone, 4e does a good job.

However, my solution, if you want to keep wizards so they don't have tons of easily reusable spells at low level?

Old-School Wizard, variant one
A wizard with this variant can only use his at-will attack spells twice per encounter (four times at paragon, six times at epic). That's twice total for all his at-will attack spells, so one magic missile and one thunderwave, perhaps.

To balance this out, the wizard can use his Intelligence instead of his Strength or Dexterity when making basic attacks with standard weapons. His attacks won't deal a lot of damage, and he's still limited to simple weapons, but this way he won't

Old-School Wizard, variant two
A wizard in this variant starts each round with MP. The amount of MP is 2 (4 at paragon, 6 at epic), plus 3 for each encounter power he knows.

Whenever the wizard uses an at-will power, it costs 1 MP. Using an encounter power costs 4 MP. (Unlike normal 4e, wizard encounter powers can be used multiple times in the same encounter if the wizard has enough MP. Daily powers are still just once per day, and the wizard must choose them after an extended rest.)

The wizard can spend a minor action to gain 1 MP, but cannot go above his normal limit. This represents him drawing upon . . . wherever wizards draw their power from.


How does that sound?

 

[burntgerbil]

If you have smart players, they will realize that this is the perfect opportunity for a rogue to shine even more than they already do. If you make these changes and you have a smart rogue player, their damage output will outshine any arcane spellcaster by leaps and bounds at every level. The arcane classes balancing factor to "arcane power at their fingertips" is that it is sometimes sub-par damage wise based on what others can do unless you (will unlikely) throw hordes and hordes of minons at them.

Many knowledgeable groups (without the mage-gimping rules you propose) play without a wizard (widely already considered the most expendable role). Play the game for a few months and you will find that they don't need nerfing, they need serious help.

 

[Rechan]

You are encouraging wizards to use crossbows and such, potentially, when they run out of magic options in a combat. Is that the intended goal? If not, it may be worth being very explicit of the goal - for example, magic missile is _much_ less powerful than it was in previous editions, so infinite magic missile isn't nearly the same as it might once have been. It's something to consider, at any rate.

To echo Keterys, a crossbow and a magic missile are essentially the same thing.

To hit:
Crossbow: Dex+2 vs. AC
MM: Int vs. Reflex.
The +2 to proficiency vs. AC is on par with attacking a non-AC defense. In general, they progress at roughly the same rate.


Damage:
Crossbow: 1d8+Dex.
Magic Missile: 2d4+Int.
On average, the MM does 4+int, because you can't roll a 1, but you also are much less likely to roll a 4+4.

So a ranger and a wizard shooting at the same target has roughly the same attack/damage output.

However, you give the wizard a crossbow, and he's less likely to hit. Why? He is not going to put a large number in his dex. Int serves the same purpose as Dexterity (it increases your AC/Ref defense). So, he would be harming himself in putting a high dex in, just so he can use a crossbow, because it's made irrelevent by his high Int.

So if you insist on going this route, I highly encourage Rangerwickett's suggestion:

To balance this out, the wizard can use his Intelligence instead of his Strength or Dexterity when making basic attacks with standard weapons. His attacks won't deal a lot of damage, and he's still limited to simple weapons, but this way he won't

In fact. There is a feat in PHB2 which basically allows someone to select a non str/dex stat in order to make basic attacks with. I would give that feat for free to any spellcaster. The feat actually assigns both attack AND damage based on their stat, so that is different than what Ranger is suggesting.