Killing a Wizard is Easy... if you know how.

[Empath Negative]

Endlessly we debate about how overpowered spellcasters are vs. melee.


Chop off the top two levels of spells (8th and 9th) for Wizards, Sorcs, Clerics and Druids 5th and 6th for Bards, 3rd and 4th for Pallies.

Clerics and Druids would still be exceptionally powerful, however.


To combat this for Clerics each Cleric would gain an additional turn undead attempt per level (in addition to the turn undead attempts they get already) but Clerics would have to sacrifice a turn undead attempt for every spell he wished to cast outside of his domains, save for cure or inflict spells.

For example, a Cleric with the Animal and Plant domain that wished to cast a prepared "Divine Might" would also have to sacrifice a turn undead attempt to do so.


For druids, change the Natural Spell feat to require the consumption of a Wild Shape use whenever they cast a spell while wild shaped.



Casters using the Wizards spell progression would not increase in spell level (but would increase caster level) at 5th, 10th, 15th, and 20th lvl (i.e. when they get a bonus feat).

Casters using the Sorcs spell progression would not increase in spell level (but would increase caster level) at 5th, 10th, and 15th.

Casters using the bardic spell progression would not increase in spell level (but would increase caster level) at 5th, 6th, 10th, 11th, 15th, 16th, and 19th, 20th.


I would leave Pally, Ranger, and Hexblade spellcasting as is.



Again, it would make the game more difficult... but it would also keep the game more balanced and arguably more fun for everyone involved.

 

[xigbar]

CoDzilla doesn't really need 8th or 9th level spells. Nor does a Wizard. I would say this bumps everyone down one on the tier system, but it does nothing to bump up the melee classes. I think Legend's attempt at condensing the spell list was one of the most respectable example I've ever seen.

Also, your posting style seems familiar, but feel free to ignore my paranoia.

 

[BriarMonkey]

Instead of all those changes, which are a lot, why not just introduce a very simple pair of mechanics.

First, with 3.x/PF only Arcane casters have a spell failure chance with armor. Make every spell caster have a spell failure chance with armor, regardless of if divine, arcane, etc. Just using the same mechanic for all casters does a lot for consistancy.

And, have all spell casters make a spellcraft check to successfully cast their spell. Successful check, and the spell works; unsuccessful check, the spell is lost.

That'd be a lot simpler than what you propose, and depending on how you set up the spellcasting DCs, much more efficient.

 

[xigbar]

Instead of all those changes, which are a lot, why not just introduce a very simple pair of mechanics.

First, with 3.x/PF only Arcane casters have a spell failure chance with armor. Make every spell caster have a spell failure chance with armor, regardless of if divine, arcane, etc. Just using the same mechanic for all casters does a lot for consistancy.

And, have all spell casters make a spellcraft check to successfully cast their spell. Successful check, and the spell works; unsuccessful check, the spell is lost.

That'd be a lot simpler than what you propose, and depending on how you set up the spellcasting DCs, much more efficient.

Depends on the DC. If it's too high, people unfamiliar with the system wil flop, and it'll just encourage further optimization by people who know how.

 

[kitcik]

The fact that wizards can lose their top two power levels of spells and still be far better than melee'ers tells you just how unbalanced this is.

Need a more general nerf. A chance of spell failure or, as in 1E, a real chance for disruption.

 

[Sekhmet]

Again, you're punishing players for picking a class they want, rather than rewarding players. Whenever you punish, players are unhappy, and the ultimate goal of any DM should be to have a good time. Unhappy players =/= good times.

Try to think of a way to reward non-casters instead, like giving them a free Vow of Poverty without the downsides. They can still own and use gear like normal, but they get all those cool bonuses to help bring them up to par.

Or even better, realize that the magical/mundane rift only appears when you consider versatility. Give noncasters a couple of spell like abilities so that they don't rely on casters for all their needs - a minutes per day, broken up however you need, Fly, Primary Stat Buff +4, and short range teleport, plus an area of effect attack (at a set dice/level, not based on their weapon/stats), and a once/day Sanctuary.
This small change helps mundane characters be more reliable on their own, without needing the casters to hold them by the hand and unleash them only to chop up the enemies as if they were a Summoned Monster. It also doesn't hurt casters at all.


I use Option #1 and #2 here Tier System for Classes for helping my mundane characters, rather than either of the ideas above. It has helped a lot, actually. The mundane characters never feel outshadowed for too long, and the casters are still very content with their schtick.

 

[Michael Silverbane]

Need a more general nerf. A chance of spell failure or, as in 1E, a real chance for disruption.

A very easy and general nerf is to allow only up to one-half of your character levels to apply to a full caster class.

I generally prefer to increase the power and versatility of other classes, rather than boofing the casters, but it is pretty easy to do the latter, and more difficult to do the former.

 

[RUMBLETiGER]

...And I still think the way to balance casters and non-casters is to give non-casters spells.

Seriously, who wants to play in a magical fantasy world and not use magic? That's like being in a Star Wars game and not being Force Sensitive.

Silly people.

 

[Naoki00_]

...And I still think the way to balance casters and non-casters is to give non-casters spells.

Seriously, who wants to play in a magical fantasy world and not use magic? That's like being in a Star Wars game and not being Force Sensitive.

Silly people.

I agree more with the "buff melee" approach, but personally I have to disagree with this quote lol. to use the star wars example, what about us that want to be Han or Chewy, (or better yet Boba Fett), none of which had 'magic' but still kicked major tail. in my games regrettably I nerf magic, since I haven't found a way to pump melee up that the whole groups happy with.

What i do first is base the casting on a point system, you want to cast a lv 0 spell? half a point from the pool. lvl 1? 1 point, etc. and the more 'magic' based you are the more points you gain each level. (lowest is 1+ casting mod, medium is 2+ casting mod, and highest is 3+ casting mod.) I find in my games this limits the spells used enough to make magic not seem so invasive and the end all answer. Second I mostly take out the utility spell like knock, or change them around slightly to make them more situational. and lastly I just completely did away with some spell levels (7-9, though some spells of those levels I made instead into rituals.) this at least seems to make my group very happy with both class types.

As for the actual 'killing' of mages, we created items that either nullify magic for a short time, or act as magical EMPs, making effects or spell casters lose their ability to channel the energy from other places and realms, though these are expensive and usually hard to get, and so are saved for emergencies.

 

[Dandu]

I agree more with the "buff melee" approach, but personally I have to disagree with this quote lol. to use the star wars example, what about us that want to be Han or Chewy, (or better yet Boba Fett), none of which had 'magic' but still kicked major tail.

Yes, but in the Star Wars RPG, if you're not a force user, you are massively outclassed.

Or so I hear.