Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Magic in D&D
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Afrodyte" data-source="post: 1990969" data-attributes="member: 8713"><p>I like the basic idea of a casting roll, but you bring up some valid points. Currently D&D magic is based upon a relatively complex system of checks and balances that altogether make it difficult to add yet another random element to the Vancian system. I think that in order to make this work, you have to get rid of all the other extraneous details that inhibit spellcasting. The check result should determine how well a spell is pulled off (IOW, if the spell has the intended effect upon the intended target). There should be a base casting DC for the spell based upon the spell's level. The check result (if successful) determines the DC of any saves related to the spell, so it's naturally harder to save against well-cast spells, just as it's harder to Listen or Spot someone who got really high Hide and Move Silently results. SR should work more like a magical AC or DR. It could make someone really hard to "hit" with a spell or soften the effects of a successful spell.</p><p></p><p>The problem with using casting checks for spells is that unless you start with a ridiculously high DC for 0th level spells, chances are that a spellcaster of sufficient level has a bonus that exceeds the DC of the spell, and the only thing you'd roll for is to see if the caster gets a natural 1. I can envision a few ways that you can put a break on this. The basic assumption I am working with here is that magic should not be easy, quick, or simple, even for the extremely talented (18+ in the casting stat). Here are some ideas I have for that:</p><p></p><p>1. <strong>Base the preparation time on spell level.</strong> This one applies more to clerics and wizards than the other classes. I envision prepared spellcasting being much like cooking. The most important ingredient is time. You cannot shortcut or bypass it. If you could, you probably have better things to do than play with pathetic little 9th-level spells. The rule I'd use is that spells have a prep time equal to one hour times the spell level. So, prepping a 9th-level spell requires 9 hours of preparation. This limits the total amount of spell levels to be used in a day to 16 (24 minus the 8 hours' rest required). If a caster wishes to pull an all-nighter and get those extra 8 spells, I'd probably impose a penalty to casting checks for the spells prepared equal to the hours of rest lost.</p><p>2. <strong>Base the casting time upon spell level. </strong> This one applies to all spellcasters. A rule of thumb is to have a spell's casting time be equal to a number of rounds equal to its level. During combat (which is when most spells see a lot of action, hence the measurement of casting time in rounds), it isn't always feasible to take the standard time to cast a much-needed spell. Thus, you can try to rush through things a bit but at a cost. This is especially true for prepared casters, whose spells I imagine to be more ritualistic in nature. Even spontaneous casters need to pace themselves to trying to manipulate too much magic too soon. For each time you halve the casting time of a spell (minimum time 1 standard action), you could give a -5 penalty to casting checks.</p><p>3. <strong>Determine the cost of failure...and success.</strong> As I stated earlier, magic should almost always do something, though whether as intended or not depends on how well you cast a spell. If a spellcaster fails a roll, he should count his lucky stars if nothing happens. Even a successful casting of a spell can induce some backlash, especially if a caster is trying to cast a very powerful spell (highest level available to the caster, above 0th), a lot of spells in a short amount of time, or if the caster is rushing things (see above). Backlash can take the form of temporary ability damage (especially Strength and/or Constitution; possibly permanent for catastrophic failures), nonlethal damage (becomes lethal after dropping below 0 nonlethal points), and other interesting side effects. If you can, take a look at the Paradox rules for Mage: The Ascension.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Afrodyte, post: 1990969, member: 8713"] I like the basic idea of a casting roll, but you bring up some valid points. Currently D&D magic is based upon a relatively complex system of checks and balances that altogether make it difficult to add yet another random element to the Vancian system. I think that in order to make this work, you have to get rid of all the other extraneous details that inhibit spellcasting. The check result should determine how well a spell is pulled off (IOW, if the spell has the intended effect upon the intended target). There should be a base casting DC for the spell based upon the spell's level. The check result (if successful) determines the DC of any saves related to the spell, so it's naturally harder to save against well-cast spells, just as it's harder to Listen or Spot someone who got really high Hide and Move Silently results. SR should work more like a magical AC or DR. It could make someone really hard to "hit" with a spell or soften the effects of a successful spell. The problem with using casting checks for spells is that unless you start with a ridiculously high DC for 0th level spells, chances are that a spellcaster of sufficient level has a bonus that exceeds the DC of the spell, and the only thing you'd roll for is to see if the caster gets a natural 1. I can envision a few ways that you can put a break on this. The basic assumption I am working with here is that magic should not be easy, quick, or simple, even for the extremely talented (18+ in the casting stat). Here are some ideas I have for that: 1. [B]Base the preparation time on spell level.[/B] This one applies more to clerics and wizards than the other classes. I envision prepared spellcasting being much like cooking. The most important ingredient is time. You cannot shortcut or bypass it. If you could, you probably have better things to do than play with pathetic little 9th-level spells. The rule I'd use is that spells have a prep time equal to one hour times the spell level. So, prepping a 9th-level spell requires 9 hours of preparation. This limits the total amount of spell levels to be used in a day to 16 (24 minus the 8 hours' rest required). If a caster wishes to pull an all-nighter and get those extra 8 spells, I'd probably impose a penalty to casting checks for the spells prepared equal to the hours of rest lost. 2. [B]Base the casting time upon spell level. [/B] This one applies to all spellcasters. A rule of thumb is to have a spell's casting time be equal to a number of rounds equal to its level. During combat (which is when most spells see a lot of action, hence the measurement of casting time in rounds), it isn't always feasible to take the standard time to cast a much-needed spell. Thus, you can try to rush through things a bit but at a cost. This is especially true for prepared casters, whose spells I imagine to be more ritualistic in nature. Even spontaneous casters need to pace themselves to trying to manipulate too much magic too soon. For each time you halve the casting time of a spell (minimum time 1 standard action), you could give a -5 penalty to casting checks. 3. [B]Determine the cost of failure...and success.[/B] As I stated earlier, magic should almost always do something, though whether as intended or not depends on how well you cast a spell. If a spellcaster fails a roll, he should count his lucky stars if nothing happens. Even a successful casting of a spell can induce some backlash, especially if a caster is trying to cast a very powerful spell (highest level available to the caster, above 0th), a lot of spells in a short amount of time, or if the caster is rushing things (see above). Backlash can take the form of temporary ability damage (especially Strength and/or Constitution; possibly permanent for catastrophic failures), nonlethal damage (becomes lethal after dropping below 0 nonlethal points), and other interesting side effects. If you can, take a look at the Paradox rules for Mage: The Ascension. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Magic in D&D
Top