Magic in D&D

[Krieg]

Note: Rambling brainstorm follows...

When thinking about D&D magic there is really only one thing that bothers me...and believe it or not it is not Vancian spell slots.

In most fantasy literature, magic always has a cost associated with it. Whether it is physically draining, slowly destroys the mind or entails unholy pacts with otherworldly entitities...magic is rarely free.

A lot of D20 games try to model that in various ways (Midnight, Grim Tales, Conan, CoCD20, The Black Company, Dark Legacies etc etc etc) but most radically alter the magic system to do so.

I've been thinking of modifying the existing arcane classes just a bit to reflect that train of thought.

First Wizards would make skill checks based on Spellcraft to cast spells, a successful check is necesary to cast the spell. 20 and 1 would mean automatic success and failure respectively. I'm also pondering "greater" successes & failures as well.

Meanwhile Sorcerers would be able to cast spells freely as they do now, but their power comes from a pact with a demon, artifact or other similar "power". Instead of facing the possibility of spell failure they face the possibility of corruption and/or madness over time (using some variation of the various madness/taint rules out there).

Thus Sorcerers would be the fast track to power, but face the possibility of pretty severe consequences over the long term while Wizardry is the generally safer but slower route to power.

Any thoughts?

 

[Myth]

First Wizards would make skill checks based on Spellcraft to cast spells, a successful check is necesary to cast the spell. 20 and 1 would mean automatic success and failure respectively. I'm also pondering "greater" successes & failures as well.

Meanwhile Sorcerers would be able to cast spells freely as they do now, but their power comes from a pact with a demon, artifact or other similar "power". Instead of facing the possibility of spell failure they face the possibility of corruption and/or madness over time (using some variation of the various madness/taint rules out there).

Thus Sorcerers would be the fast track to power, but face the possibility of pretty severe consequences over the long term while Wizardry is the generally safer but slower route to power.

Any thoughts?

I like it. I'm in early campaign set-up stages myself, and looking for a way to have the traditional wizards and sorcerors while making them different from each other.

My major issue with the d20 magic system is that all casters seem to do the same process, yet be convinced their actions represent widely differeing methods.

The sponsor demon-artifact-thingie idea is good, too -- gives a source for those new spells popping into your head when you level up.

If you were to throw clerics into the mix, what would THEY look like?

 

[jaker2003]

Divine spells, by difinition, come from an outside source, namely a divine one

 

[Krieg]

If you were to throw clerics into the mix, what would THEY look like?

Not really sure right now as I'm just tossing ideas a the wall to see what will stick...

Although the idea of a non-spellcasting priest really appeals to me. Something where they can perform miracles which are instead granted powers. OGL Horror & GR's Medieval Player's Manual explore a bit in that direction.

That would help move "men of faith" away from the battlefield medic/spell battery mode and return some of the mystery/awe I feel they should have.

Of course that somewhat defeats my goal of trying to stay as close to the D&D default as possible. lol

 

[MeiRen]

What happens to the Wizard if he fails his roll? If the answer is "nothing", why doesn't he just throw a lightning bolt every turn?

Basically, here's the problem. Magic can't be common as dirt. If it is, two things happen, which most people don't want to happen:

1. The word "magic" conjures up an image of mystery and reclusivness. If its common, it can't very well be mysterious too.

2. You need some way to limit a spell casters power, or they'll become more powerful than everyone else in the group. Gandalf is cool and all, but he was a God (really), and far and away more powerful than all the other heroes. (remember that scene in the second movie where he blocked the attacks of Glimli, Legolas, and Aragorn? All at the same time, without even trying? Yeah. That character's cool, but for the story to work, he has to back off and let the main characters do their thing. That's a dynamic that just doesn'twork in roleplaying games.

So, you need a way to let wizards summon down the impossible coolness they read about in Lord of the Rings, without making them unbalanced. Limiting their spells is the easiest way to do that.

Anyway, uh....sorry I kind of went off on a long tangent. Anyway, I like where you're going, I've been thinking some ideas along the same lines. Probably the easiest variant to use is the "vitalizing rules" from Unearthed Arcana. There are others, but....I dunno. Still brainstorming myself.

 

[Afrodyte]

Krieg,

I like the idea. It's similar to something I've worked on before and have recently revisited. If you'd like to see what I have, let me know.

As for the "cost" of magic, I'd prefer to keep things flexible. A spell can backfire (how about a taste of your own chain lightning?). You can mistakenly cast the opposite of a certain spell (reduce person instead of enlarge person). A spell can work entirely too well (like a dominate person spell gone awry would make the target incapable of doing anything except what you say). In other words, something always happens, but not what you intended. Consider the ramifications of fumbling a Conjuration (calling) or Conjuration (summoning) spell.

Of course, the more powerful the spell, the higher the price of failure.

 

[Krieg]

What happens to the Wizard if he fails his roll? If the answer is "nothing", why doesn't he just throw a lightning bolt every turn?

He still burns the slot.

Remember, I'm still keeping the Wizard/Sorcerer pretty close to stock outside of the changes noted. That means spells known & spell slots, not a variant spell point system that uses hp/ability damage etc.

As for the "cost" of magic, I'd prefer to keep things flexible. A spell can backfire (how about a taste of your own chain lightning?). You can mistakenly cast the opposite of a certain spell (reduce person instead of enlarge person). A spell can work entirely too well (like a dominate person spell gone awry would make the target incapable of doing anything except what you say). In other words, something always happens, but not what you intended. Consider the ramifications of fumbling a Conjuration (calling) or Conjuration (summoning) spell.

Yeah, I touched on that just a bit. I'm actually thinking of just porting over the entire system from Pelgrane Press's Primer of Practical Magic. It takes into account "illustrious" Successess & "dismal" failures for beating or missing the DC by a certain amount.

 

[IceFractal]

For a more miracle-based, less spellcasting based Cleric, you could adapt the Warlock class from Complete Arcane. Replace the Eldritch Blast with something appropriate to the god (increased melee damage for a god of war, a force shield for a god of protection, a flaming blast for a god of fire, etc), and change the invocations too (although many of the current ones would work pretty well for a god of shadows, death, or evil). Change to DR to aligned instead of Cold Iron, remove the UMD abilities, and you're good to go.

 

[dvvega]

I remember the old Masque of the Red Death had a Charlatan class that required a Saving Throw when he cast a spell. Unless it was a house rule I created.

Essentially, tapping into the magical forces could send the character unconscious and unable to cast for the rest of the day.

In 3.5 terms it would be a FOR save DC 10 + spell level or something similar.

D

 

[Darklion]

First Wizards would make skill checks based on Spellcraft to cast spells, a successful check is necesary to cast the spell.

This is a terrible mechanic, because it penalizes the wizard at the one thing he is capable of doing: casting spells. Since many spells are subject to saving throws to reduce or negate spell effects (quite a few spells are all-or-nothing depending on the saving throw result), some spells require attack rolls, and virtually all spells are subject to spell resistance, the ability of spells to actually affect an opponent is already fairly dicey. Requiring wizards to make a Spellcraft check PLUS saving throw PLUS spell resistance, PLUS a potential Concentration check should they try casting in combat or suboptimal conditions, PLUS the chance of failing an attack roll?

This would be like forcing a fighter to make a skill check to see if he can correctly swing his sword, before he is even allowed to make an attack roll against his opponent.

It gets even worse if a failed check for the proposed spellcasting check means the wizard loses the spell slot. Then the wizard chews up a very valuable resource -- spells per day -- simply trying to perform the most basic function of his class, and again, that's before he even has to worry about the spell failing due to a missed attack roll, spell resistance, or saving throws.