Limiting Magic

[Griffith Dragonlake]

I'd still suggest that the OP limit spells to 6th-level to preserve the feel they want; or maybe limit it to 5th for most classes, but 4th for Bards, and 6th for specialist wizards (but only 6th-level spells from their specialty). Bards get access to some planar travel spells and whatnot as 5th or 6th level spells that would otherwise be 7th or 8th level for wizards.

As long as specialist wizards can get access to Stone to Flesh, Greater Dispelling, and such, it shouldn't be problematic using monsters pretty much as-is (since they could at least make scrolls of those spells, and magic items like Stone Salve).

I'd also grant all spellcasters all of the metamagic feats that cost additional levels for free. After all, they're already paying the cost in terms of the higher level spells and now they have a use for the higher level spell slots.

In addition, take a look at the incantation rules from Unearthed Arcana found here. That way you can still have a secret cult or coven working together to Gate in a BBEG.

 

[White Whale]

Arkhandus, you bring up valid points, and I will adress them.

Uh, y'know the DMG already has guidelines for that, right?

I know.

A metropolis, like Rome or somesuch, would typically have 4 wizards of 13th-16th level, 4 sorcerers of the same level range, 4 clerics of 13th-18th level, and 4 druids of 13th-18th level. Along with 8 members of each of those classes ranging from 6th-8th level (9th max for the priest types). And several times more of much lower level.

Metropolises aren't likely to be found in every kingdom or region, however. Most cities will have only 2 individuals of each major spellcasting class ranging from 7th-10th level or 7th-12th level, and 4 individuals of 3rd-6th level in each of those classes, and maybe a dozen of lower level. Towns and villages would only tend to have a 1st-4th level spellcaster of each class, maybe a 7th-level one in the bigger towns. If they have any spellcasters at all.

Fine, this is what the DMG says. Summary:
Metropolis: ~8 arcane casters capable of Teleporting
Large city: ~6 arcane casters capable of Teleporting
Small city: ~2 arcane casters capable of Teleporting

So in the biggest cities of the world, which are likely to be countable on one hand or two maybe, you could expect to have 8 folks capable of 5th-level arcane spells (like Teleport, but it's less likely that the 4 highest sorcerers in town all know that spell), and another 8 folks capable of 5th-level divine spells (like Raise Dead, but that's only for the 4 highest clerics, not the 4 highest druids in town).

This is where I think you oversimplify. The chance that a town is a small city or bigger is 15% (DMG table 5-2). This makes me believe that there is a lot of small cities, and hence a lot of Teleporting-spellcasters.

If one of those metropolises went to war with another, they might be able to teleport a few assassins into each other's territory each day, with some margin of error, and may be able to use limited high-level-spellcasting tactics in their war. But they'd be able to get their leaders Raised from the dead anyway, probably,

Sure, Raising from dead is one option, but it costs far more than the attack itself. In addition, the raised leader is less powerful (-1 level). So the attackers win big time.

Also, if the leader is somehow prevented from being raised (if kidnapped, disappeared,etc), a power vacuum is likely to occur, in which opposing sides fight for their rights. Again, attackers win.

so the clash of armies would still be an important deciding factor in their war,

Indeed, the clash of armies will still be important. But the hit-and-run possibilities that high level spells introduce may be an important asset before it comes to the clashing of armies.

and the few major spellcasters on each side would be kept busy with just trying to counteract the biggest spells the other side's major spellcasters were using for espionage, infiltration, and destruction.

I disagree. Trying to counter the opposing moves is a definitive suboptimal solution in D&D. Creating a defense for any possible attack requires far more resources than attacking.

Whereas a moderately larger number of cities would be lucky to have access to a single spellcaster who knows Teleport and has 1-3 spell slots for it each day, or a single cleric who knows Raise Dead, or a single druid who knows Reincarnate.

And that stuff's only if using the DMG's guideline for communities, since it's only there as an optional guideline to begin with.

I know it is just a guideline. However, with these guidelines, I disagree in how the DMG presents the world with all these high level spellcasters. IMO, it should be very different from the one presented by the DMG (ex. no diseases, like you mentioned).
Moreover, I have the impression that most gaming groups and published adventures assume more higher level NPCs than the guidelines suggest.


Sorry for being off topic. Hopefully Obergnom already has enough feedback to make a decision.

 

[Maldor]

I am a big fan of banning Teleport and its likes, and I feel your counterarguments are quite moot:
-prevent TPK: So can several other spells (Wall of Force comes to mind), without introducing the highly anti-climatic Teleport (one moment deep inside a dungeon next to a huge a axe-wielding skeleton, then the next moment in your cosy hut)

A wall of force doesn't stop a TPK it delays it for 10 rounds and during this time your BBEG is summoning and readying his empowered fireball the players wold heal but all or most of there healing is used up so what your wall of force did was give the bad guy time to regroup, heal and be ready to destroy you in the sixty seconds when your wall comes down.

P.S. about the teleporting mage blowing up armys i think it's better to use phantam steed fast low level only needs cast once per strike rather then twice like teleport and can't be blocked by D-lock lets you use those two 5 lvl slots for empowered fireballs.

 

[White Whale]

A wall of force doesn't stop a TPK it delays it for 10 rounds and during this time your BBEG is summoning and readying his empowered fireball the players wold heal but all or most of there healing is used up so what your wall of force did was give the bad guy time to regroup, heal and be ready to destroy you in the sixty seconds when your wall comes down.

Imo, this would be an interesting situation where the PCs should have a fair chance to survive by fleeing (or regrouping themselves), rather than the teleport-home solution.

P.S. about the teleporting mage blowing up armys i think it's better to use phantam steed fast low level only needs cast once per strike rather then twice like teleport and can't be blocked by D-lock lets you use those two 5 lvl slots for empowered fireballs.

The phantom steed doesn't take you right next to the BBEGs bed where he is sleeping, though.

 

[Aus_Snow]

One popular variant I've seen a lot of folks use (though never used myself) is to limit spellcasters to only taking half their levels in any one spellcasting class. Thus, you could play a Sorcerer 10 / Paladin 10, or a Wizard 10 / Rogue 10, or a Cleric 10 / Barbarian 10.

Yeah, I've seen this done a few times. It's not to my tastes either, but that doesn't mean it can't work fine.

And hey presto, max. 5th level spells. Just add a bit of DM forethought and monitoring of monster abilities, etc. Can't ask for easier than that.

Or, more in line with the OP, how about limiting all casters to half their normal spell level max., rounding up? So, Bards = 3rd, Paladins = 2nd. Not counting metamagic, o' course. Just to 'even things up' a bit. Dunno, just a thought.

 

[Obergnom]

Well,

I got to the conclusion that 6th level spells seem to be a good place to stop.

I still have not found the time to look out for the following probs, though:

Do I need to remove damage cap from spells? Maybe add a metamagic feat that allows you to do that?

Are some schools (conjuration) seriously disadvantaged?

Should caster gain a MM Feat every time they would otherwise get a new spell level? (I would def. go the way of, giving them higher level slots but not spells)

What about the Bard? I guess Paladin and Ranger are fine the way they are, but Bards gain a few spells at earlier levels because of their wanky casting progressen (of topic: Why didn't they just make them full casters?)


And I definatly plan to look at monsters before throwing them at my players... it is as if I want to remove some of their power just to be able to stomp on them more easily...

 

[Pyrex]

I'd also grant all spellcasters all of the metamagic feats that cost additional levels for free. After all, they're already paying the cost in terms of the higher level spells and now they have a use for the higher level spell slots.

I think you've got the seed of a really interesting idea here.

What if we inserted breakpoints into the SpellsPerDay chart that granted free metamagic instead of new spells?

The net aim would be that at 17th level (when a wizard would ordinarily have access to 9th level spells) he would instead have access to 5th level spells, but would also be able to apply +4 Levels of metamagic that round.

So the wizard could cast a 5th level spell and a Quickened 5th level spell for example.

 

[Scurvy_Platypus]

I think you've got the seed of a really interesting idea here.

What if we inserted breakpoints into the SpellsPerDay chart that granted free metamagic instead of new spells?

The net aim would be that at 17th level (when a wizard would ordinarily have access to 9th level spells) he would instead have access to 5th level spells, but would also be able to apply +4 Levels of metamagic that round.

So the wizard could cast a 5th level spell and a Quickened 5th level spell for example.

That's the sort of thing I was talking about when I said:

As for the casters sucking compared to other classes.... *shrug* that's a lot more of a personal thing. If you're really worried about it, I'd let 'em continue getting additional slots even though you've capped the level of the magic spells themselves. Higher level slots can be traded in for various metamagic effects, instead of casters having to waste feats buying metamagic feats.

I've just never played a caster in d20, so I'm kinda clueless on what it would look like.

 

[Nifft]

I'd guess 6th-level spells to be a decent stopping point for spell level advancement. Maybe 5th-level, but 6th-level spells are where you get Greater Dispelling, Stone to Flesh (IIRC), etc. 5th-level's alright too, but there may be some monsters or whatnot that use special attacks or defenses you're expected to use Greater Dispelling, Stone to Flesh, or similar stuff against.

1/ Greater dispelling is irrelevant if you cap all casters at 10th level.

2/ Petrification can be reversed with break enchantment, a 5th level spell.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Arkhandus]

A, yeah, but only if you choose to restrict PCs to a max of 10 levels in any spellcasting class, rather than just capping the max spell level they can learn and cast.

B, true, though only clerics and bards get it, IIRC (and the latter only if you don't restrict them to 10th-level). Still, a valid point.

Like I said, 5th-level is OK too, it just depends a bit on how you handle other stuff. For example, if monsters with spell-like abilities or spellcasting (like dragons or whatnot) aren't capped at being 10th-level effective casters, then Greater Dispelling remains kinda important for trying to overcome their high-caster-level effects.