Ideas and musings on my ideal magic rules system

[StreamOfTheSky]

Let me paraphrase you to make sure I understand: "I don't want classes to balanced with each other." If this is accurate, then, again, this is a deal-breaker. We would have nothing further to say on the subject and your system would therefore likely never see the light of day (because I'm positive a vast majority of people would agree with me). If it's not accurate, Lucy, you've got some 'splainin to do!

I don't want perfect balance, I want noticeable differences in what a caster and non-caster can do. I don't mind a high level wizard being more outright powerful than a high level fighter. I say this as someone who mostly plays non-casters.

What I do want, is for the casters to not be able to outperform the non-casters at their own jobs. I don't mind casters being the only ones who can create elaborate illusions, teleport around the world, mentally dominate others, etc... But I still want the noncasters to be relevant, even if not equal. I don't want spells that instantly solve locks or polymorph the caster into a better fighter than the fighter (buffing the FIGHTER w/ polymorph to make him even more crazy deadly is cool, though).

I'm more concerned with overall gameplay balance than balance between characters. By that I mean things like being able to call it a day early and use up gobs of daily resources to make that 1-2 encounters a cinch. The ability to nova the hell out of enemies on the first round of combat with the most powerful crap you've got. The fact that not only can casters do all that, they also get the all day buff spells, the healing effects, the outright immunities... The "all day" stuff is what the non-casters are supposed to be good at, but a caster in 3E or older can have all day flight, mind affecting / poison / fear immunity, and...that's only 3 spells so far. I don't mind casters having the big budget effects, the encounter enders, the utility spells. I just would like to see them have less of them, be unable to use them en masse right off the bat, encroach upon noncasters less, and develop a greater defined role for noncasters and make the casters somewhat reliant on them.

I want to give noncasters solid, concrete purposes for being there, without scrapping the "unlimited, all day" resources vs. "limited access / expendable" resources paradigm.

This does mean noncasters need to gain a bunch of powerful, awesome, (in many cases) way beyond superhuman straight into quasi-magical territory abilities. Which I imagine will irk many people. My response is that I agree with Ryan Dancy and Justin Alexander about D&D (3E and older) having "quartiles" of play. Low levels is more realistic, magic more limited, and at those levels the noncasters would have little magical stuff. This would change as higher levels are reached. If you don't like it...don't play higher levels. But if wizards are going to be teleporting around, trapping people's souls, bringing back the dead, and so forth... the noncasters need to surpass normal human capabilities to remain relevant!

I hope this clarified things for you, and was not just the giant rambling wall of text it now appears to be.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

And a bump, cause I'd like more input.

 

[mkill]

[MENTION=35909]StreamOfTheSky[/MENTION]: It's an interesting idea, but it's not D&D 5E. If you want to build it into an RPG, which I think you should, you should market it as a new system, not a version of D&D.

 

[GM Dave]

Looking over your list and the limits on what you want to put on magic.

My question is... would some that came to your game and magic system 'feel' like a Wizard?

If your answer is 'but it is balanced this way' then the answer is not acceptable because 'the play is the thing'.

If you want limitations then there are other ways to do things to make things balanced.

You can 'charge' wizards a casting time to let loose their magic, you can buff the abilities of non-wizards (why is the thief forced to throw daggers when he could be throwing vials of acid or alchemist fire?), you can 'charge' wizards a depeletion cost or cool down time.

The actual spells do not need to be nerfed or named forbidden. You also don't need to say the only 'right way' a wizard can play is as a cannon with colourful ammo.

 

[AlioTheFool]

I'm likely in the minority here, but I despise Vancian magic, and I honestly don't really like this idea either. I'm personally a fan of the 4E system.

What I wouldn't mind is a cross-breed of 4E and previous systems. I'll accept Vancian daily "fire-and-forget" spells, as long as there are some at-will options for casters, so I don't have to sit around checking Twitter for 3 turns while everyone else rolls dice.

In addition, there must be class balance in DnDNext. No one should feel like anyone at their table has an "I Win" button. I can understand if WotC creates classes that aren't necessarily designed for combat-effectiveness, as long as those are clearly classes meant for players in games where non-combat situations are going to be prevalent.

I get that there is a large contingent of people who didn't like the changes made to D&D in 4th Edition. While I can get behind a "bridged" edition, that marries the best of 4E with the best of other editions, I am of the opinion that 4E was the "best" edition, and I want to see its concepts carried forward so everyone has a chance to enjoy their time at the table.

 

[BobTheNob]

Let me paraphrase you to make sure I understand: "I don't want classes to balanced with each other." If this is accurate, then, again, this is a deal-breaker. We would have nothing further to say on the subject and your system would therefore likely never see the light of day (because I'm positive a vast majority of people would agree with me). If it's not accurate, Lucy, you've got some 'splainin to do!

If you think the only way to make classes balanced is to homogenize them I suggest you keep playing 4e. It is exactly what your looking for

 

[Rhenny]

For the core, I think we need to have Vancian spell slots. That is what D&D was and should be.

Personally, I'd love to add to the core and give spell casters a chance to acquire magical abilities (feats) that give the caster some "at will" spells. If not feats, here's another interesting way to give casters "at will" spells:

Make a list of spells that can become mastered (or just denote that in the spell description). Then at each level, a caster can attempt to master a spell. If the spell is sufficiently lower in level than the caster the attempt will succeed automatically (perhaps 2 or 3 levels below max casting slot). If a caster tries to master a more powerful spell make the chance to master more difficult (DC 10 plus spell level or something). At any point in the game, a caster can master a maximum of 2 spells (or maybe 3 at levels over 10th).

Just an idea.