Matrix Spell Casting

[Rasyr]

The following rules show more on how I view magic ought to work.

What is magic - Magic is made up of several parts. The first being mana, and the next being the spell matrix. (both explained seperately below) Magic is a dangerous, unpredictible thing to attempt to wield. Being so dangerous, the thought of spells being cast so automatically seems a little silly. The rules that follow attempt to fix this issue.

Mana - Mana is a form of psychoactive energy. The source of this energy is unknown, and scholars across the ages have argued about where it comes from, with no final decision ever being reached.

Spell Matrix - This is a three dimensional lattice-like framework. Once formed, if it is empowered (by pushing mana through it), it can make changes to the very fabric of reality. These changes are as varied as can be, everything from healing damage to creating huge balls of fire to hurl at an enemy.

There are many different ways to form these Spell Matrixes. Some casters use a focus, such as a holy symbol, while others use material items, that are consumed in the casting, as the core of the matrix formed. A few rare magic users use their own bodies as a focus for these unimaginable energies, just to name a few....

One major point about this set of spell casting rules is that when preparing spells for the day, all magic users are actually preparing (studying, memorizing, praying for, etc..) a set of Spell Matrixes. The caster may then use any of his spell slots (number of spells per day) to cast any spell that he has prepared of an equal or lesser level (equal or less than the spell slot that is). Casting a spell also does not remove the matrix, even though it does use up one of the spell slots for the day. Thus a Wizard need only prepare one Magic Missile[i/i] spell, and can then cast it any number of times per day, so long as he has the spell slots to power it. The same goes for a Druid who want to cast Magic Fang.

Note: This system does not change the normal number of spells per day that a spell caster may actually cast. The charts for the number of Spells per Day are used to determine the number of Spell Matrixes and Spell Slots that a caster has access to each day. Both are equal to the number of Spells per Day that a caster normally has.

Since this system tends to tread upon one of the unique features of the Sorcerer, the following changes are made to that class to compensate.

• The Sorcerer no longer needs material components to cast spells. He now uses his own body as a focus for spells that he casts. If a spell requires a high priced material component, the Sorcerer pays this cost in experience points equal to the gold piece value of the component. If a spell requires both an expensive component and an experience point cost, then the Sorcerer pays both costs as experience point costs.
• The Sorcerer now gains Bonus Spells Known as the other spell using classes. He uses his Charisma score to determine how many additional spells he knows.
• The Sorcerer gains a natural +2 bonus to all Spellcasting Rolls. This ability does stack with the Innate Spellcaster Feat below.

Spellcasting Roll - Due to the vary dangerous nature of magic, spell casting is not always an automatic success. To successfully cast a spell, the caster must roll (1d20 + caster level + spell stat modifier) and beat a DC of (10 + (2 x spell's level)). Success means that the spell is cast successfully. Failure means that the spell slot was used but that the spell was not cast. A Catastrophic Failure (roll of 1 on the d20) means that the spell slot and the matrix were both lost. The magic user can prepare the matrix again the next day. For a Sorcerer, this means that he has lost the ability to select that particular spell for the rest of the day. He will be able to meditate and recover the lost knowledge of the spell come the next day.

Spell users will no longer have to make a seperate roll for Arcane Spell Failure due to armor worn. This is now incorporated into the Spellcasting Roll. For each 5% chance of Arcane Spell Failure, the spell user receives a +1 modifier to the DC of spells that he attempts to cast.

Overcasting - A spell user may attempt to cast more spells than normally allowed in a given day, but this comes at a great cost to the spell user. First, his Spellcasting DC is modified by +2 for every spell over his normal number allowed that he attampts to cast. This modifier is comulative with itself so that the first spell above the normal number allowed is has +2 to the DC, then second has a +4 to the DC, and so forth. Even if the spell is successfully cast, the caster will take a number of points of Temporary Constitution Damage equal to the level of the spell just cast. There is no way to avoid this damage. If the caster should happen to fail his Spellcasting Roll when Overcasting, he takes a number of points of Permanent Constitution Damage equal to the level of the spell just cast, plus the spell is treated as if the caster had rolled a Catastrophic Failure as detailed above. Both the Temporary and Permanent damage may be healed as per the normal methods outlined for restoring ability damage.

It is important to note that caster does not have to be completely out of available spell slots to be able to Overcast a spell. If a mage is out of thrid level spell slots, but still has first and second level slots available, he may still attempt to cast a third level spell by Overcasting.

Overloading - Overloading a spell is the act of using a higer level spell slot to power a lower level spell. Overloading a spell raises the effective casting level of a spell (thus raising the DC of the Spellcasting Roll and the DC of the Saving Throw against the spell) by the difference between the normal level of the spell and the spell slot being used (using a third level slot to power a first level spell increases the level of the spell by 2). If the Spellcasting Roll for an Overloaded spell should fail, it is treated as a Catastrophic Failure, as detailed above.


New Feat

Innate Spellcaster
[ General ]
Prerequisites: The ability to cast spells
Benefits: The caster who gains this a innate bonus of +2 to all Spellcasting Rolls.
Notes: This Feat may be taken only once.

Comments are welcome......

 

[Rasyr]

this has been read 42 times (when I post this message), and not a single person has a comment?

Do you like it?

Do you hate it?

Opinions, please.....

 

[Seraphael]

Well, I like alot of things about the system, but here are a few comments:

Separating memorization of a spell from the number of times per day one can cast that same spell is one of my favorites, but I am left wondering if this might challenge class balance. Not to mention I am not sure that the Sorcerer is even needed in such a system at all since their major advantage has been given to everyone. Of course, you could disallow wizards to add metamagic feats to spells on the fly (they need to memorize matrixes with metamagic feats already applied) while allowing Sorcerers the same thing if you wanted to give them something of their own.

I think that the penalties for overloading a spell are a bit harsh since a caster can already do that with the normal system. I'd say the same thing about overcasting, but at least there is some benefit beyond what is normally available for doing so (casting more spells per day).

It also seems that the spellcasting failure roll is a bit high, I'd expect casters to fail to cast their spells fairly frequently by this system (just under 50% of the time for their best spells). If thats your goal then you set the DC right, otherwise I suggest a straight 10+spell level. Adding arcane failure to the spellcasting roll is a great idea, as long as you intend for casters to wear at least light armor. It is nice for spellcasters to have a way to reduce their chance of failing to cast a spell in armor (by using lower level spell slots).

 

[Rasyr]

Well, I like alot of things about the system, but here are a few comments:

Separating memorization of a spell from the number of times per day one can cast that same spell is one of my favorites, but I am left wondering if this might challenge class balance. Not to mention I am not sure that the Sorcerer is even needed in such a system at all since their major advantage has been given to everyone. Of course, you could disallow wizards to add metamagic feats to spells on the fly (they need to memorize matrixes with metamagic feats already applied) while allowing Sorcerers the same thing if you wanted to give them something of their own.

In exchange for the memorization bit, Sorcerers no longer require material components for any spell. This is a large boon.

Additionally, the Sorcerer, being more of a natural caster, gains a bonus to their spell casting roll.

These two things, with the addition of bonus spells more than make up for the loss of the non-memorization bonus.

One last thing, Wizards must still prepare their spells each day, they just get more flexibility in the number they prepare.. Also, since the Wizard still prepares his spells every morning, if he wants to mata-magic them, that is still done during preparation, and it still takes up a matrix slot (using the new level of the spell after the meta-ability is applied)

The system specifically does not mention meta-magic feats because there is essentially no change in them (Wizards must prepare the spells with the feat, and Sorcerers must use them on the fly).

I think that the penalties for overloading a spell are a bit harsh since a caster can already do that with the normal system. I'd say the same thing about overcasting, but at least there is some benefit beyond what is normally available for doing so (casting more spells per day).

the penalty ONLY applies if they fail their spell casting roll.

It also seems that the spellcasting failure roll is a bit high, I'd expect casters to fail to cast their spells fairly frequently by this system (just under 50% of the time for their best spells). If thats your goal then you set the DC right, otherwise I suggest a straight 10+spell level. Adding arcane failure to the spellcasting roll is a great idea, as long as you intend for casters to wear at least light armor. It is nice for spellcasters to have a way to reduce their chance of failing to cast a spell in armor (by using lower level spell slots).

Quite frequently? I doubt it. a first level Wizard with an 18 Int has a bonus of 5 (1 for level & 4 for Int bonus) added to his roll. This means that the player MUST roll a 7 or higher o sucessfully cast a first level spell. This amounts to closer to a 33% chance of failure rather than the 50% you sight.

And yes, magic is always described as being dangerous, yet in D&D spells are cast automatically with NO chance of failure (should the casting time be completed without interruption).

Wearing armor is up the caster. All I did was to remove a seperate, odd roll which did NOT use the same mechanic as everything else. Think of it... with this system you could create new Feats, ones that allows a caster to reduce the DC of spells, and others to reduce the Arcance Failure Chance on worn armor.

It is meant as it is written. It is meant to be dangerous, and to provide the chance of failurem or else it is nothing more than an infantile race to see who can gain the most spells first, since nobody will ever bungle/fumble with a spell in D&D as it is now....

Additionally, this stays within the core mechanics, and does not introduce new mechanics......

 

[Seraphael]

In exchange for the memorization bit, Sorcerers no longer require material components for any spell. This is a large boon.

Additionally, the Sorcerer, being more of a natural caster, gains a bonus to their spell casting roll.

These two things, with the addition of bonus spells more than make up for the loss of the non-memorization bonus.

One last thing, Wizards must still prepare their spells each day, they just get more flexibility in the number they prepare.. Also, since the Wizard still prepares his spells every morning, if he wants to mata-magic them, that is still done during preparation, and it still takes up a matrix slot (using the new level of the spell after the meta-ability is applied)

Actually, I understand that you changed the Sorcerer in an attempt to give them some power back (and agree that it needed to be done to keep the class), but I was actually questioning whether or not magic users would become overpowered compared to non-magic users through their greater flexibility. Are Clerics, Druids, Wizards and Sorcerers more powerful than Fighters, Barbarians, Rogues and Monks using these new rules?

As far as my questioning the need for the Sorcerer at all, that comment was based on the fact that you felt the need to give them something more to make the class worth it at all using this system. Would anyone who chose to use Matrixed spellcasting actually miss the Sorcerer if it was not included?

the penalty ONLY applies if they fail their spell casting roll.

I understand that, but would anyone risk powering a 4th level spell with a 5th level slot considering the possible consequences (keep in mind that even your hypothetical 1st level/18Int wizard will fail a normall spellcasting check 33% of the time. which is more than significant)? I know I'd think twice about it except under the most dire of circumstances. Using the standard rules if a character wants to prepare a (non-metamagiced) fireball in a 5th level slot that works just fine.

Overcasting is a great idea, and I although I mentioned that the risks seemed a bit high, there is some definate benifit to doing so. It is a nice way to introduce risk to spellcasting in dire situations (when one no longer has open spell slots).

Quite frequently? I doubt it. a first level Wizard with an 18 Int has a bonus of 5 (1 for level & 4 for Int bonus) added to his roll. This means that the player MUST roll a 7 or higher o sucessfully cast a first level spell. This amounts to closer to a 33% chance of failure rather than the 50% you sight.

And yes, magic is always described as being dangerous, yet in D&D spells are cast automatically with NO chance of failure (should the casting time be completed without interruption).

Well, you assume that every wizard, druid, cleric and sorcer starts with an 18 in their primary spellcasting statistic, which isn't the case. A character with a lower score (like a 15) has a lower bonus (3 in this case), meaning that they must roll 9 or higher (and therefore will fail to cast their highest level spells 45% of the time). That was the reason that I chose to call it just under 50% rather than mention a specific number. In either case, it seems a bit harsh to expect that a character will fail to cast their spells even one third of the time. I agree that a chance to fail when casting spells is interesting, but it can't get out of hand if you expect magic users to depend on spellcasting when their lives are in danger.

Wearing armor is up the caster. All I did was to remove a seperate, odd roll which did NOT use the same mechanic as everything else. Think of it... with this system you could create new Feats, ones that allows a caster to reduce the DC of spells, and others to reduce the Arcance Failure Chance on worn armor.

This is exactly why I said I liked this aspect of the rules. As it stands, a wizard has the same chance to fail to cast a spell when wearing armor regardless of their skill or the difficulty of the spell. Your system changes that by changing the spell failure roll into a modifier to the spellcasting failure check, which I think is a good decision.

 

[Rasyr]

Note: the failure chance is part of what keeps it even....

It is important to note that normal failure only causes the spell to fizzle, with no bad effects....

Even rolling a 1 on the spell casting roll only means that you lose the spell for the remainder of the day.

The only real nasty stuff comes into play if you are overcasting..

Which a spell user should not do often.....

 

[Rasyr]

Previous answer was a quickie, as it was almost time to leave work....
More detailed answer below....

Actually, I understand that you changed the Sorcerer in an attempt to give them some power back (and agree that it needed to be done to keep the class), but I was actually questioning whether or not magic users would become overpowered compared to non-magic users through their greater flexibility. Are Clerics, Druids, Wizards and Sorcerers more powerful than Fighters, Barbarians, Rogues and Monks using these new rules?

Actually I don't think they are. The Spellcasting roll introduces some chance into the casting of spells. And under normal circumstances the worst that happens (so long as the player does not roll a 1) is that the spell fizzles, and they lose the slot. Even on a Fumble (a roll of 1), they only lose the ability to cast the spell for the rest of the day. Nothing real dangerous in this..

As far as my questioning the need for the Sorcerer at all, that comment was based on the fact that you felt the need to give them something more to make the class worth it at all using this system. Would anyone who chose to use Matrixed spellcasting actually miss the Sorcerer if it was not included?

While the Sorcerer does the same thing as the Wizard (i.e. casts Spells), he now does so differently, because he no longer needs spell components. This gives him a different flavor than the Wizard, which he really didn't have in the core books. Also, he actually gains more than the Wizard does. The Sorcerer gains more power overall, while the Wizard only gains a little more flexibility (since he must still prepare his spells as before, only now he gets to prepare more and use them more than once if he wishes).

I understand that, but would anyone risk powering a 4th level spell with a 5th level slot considering the possible consequences (keep in mind that even your hypothetical 1st level/18Int wizard will fail a normall spellcasting check 33% of the time. which is more than significant)? I know I'd think twice about it except under the most dire of circumstances. Using the standard rules if a character wants to prepare a (non-metamagiced) fireball in a 5th level slot that works just fine.

It is part of the trade off for increased flexibility. But please notice that the DC for casting an Overloaded Spell is not as high as casting a spell of equivalent level. In the example I give, using a third level slot to cast a first level spell, the DC for the overloaded spell is only 14, where a normal third level spell has a DC of 16 using this system.

It is also important to note that while the DCs go up with each level, so does the bonus the spell caster uses to add to his roll (since it is based on both his spell stat bonus AND his level), so lower level actually become easier to cast over time. This helps reflect a mages' growing skill with handling magic. It also allows the mage a chance to fail, just like Fighters and other have with melee attacks (with similar disadvantages).

There is also the Feat listed at the end of the rules. It gives the spell user a bonus to his spellcasting rolls, thus reducing his chances of failure even more....

Overcasting is a great idea, and I although I mentioned that the risks seemed a bit high, there is some definate benifit to doing so. It is a nice way to introduce risk to spellcasting in dire situations (when one no longer has open spell slots).

Yes, the risks are high. They are meant to be so that Overcasting is only attempted in situations that really warrant it, rather than having it become a common occurence.

Well, you assume that every wizard, druid, cleric and sorcer starts with an 18 in their primary spellcasting statistic, which isn't the case. A character with a lower score (like a 15) has a lower bonus (3 in this case), meaning that they must roll 9 or higher (and therefore will fail to cast their highest level spells 45% of the time). That was the reason that I chose to call it just under 50% rather than mention a specific number. In either case, it seems a bit harsh to expect that a character will fail to cast their spells even one third of the time. I agree that a chance to fail when casting spells is interesting, but it can't get out of hand if you expect magic users to depend on spellcasting when their lives are in danger.

Actualy no I don't, but like I mention above, there is a Feat to give a bonus. Also, a Dm may decide that certain races (like Elves and Gnomes) might get an inherent bonus to spellcasting as well (although I wouldn't recommend this without trading it out for another ability).

This is exactly why I said I liked this aspect of the rules. As it stands, a wizard has the same chance to fail to cast a spell when wearing armor regardless of their skill or the difficulty of the spell. Your system changes that by changing the spell failure roll into a modifier to the spellcasting failure check, which I think is a good decision.

Thanks! I play another game where this is how it works as well. In fact many of these ideas are from that system, translated over to d20 rules. I wrote these rules because I saw spell users as too powerful compared to non-spell users in D&D. I mean, the fighter has a chance to miss with his sword, and so do the other professions who specialize in melee, but the spell users (unless they get hit while casting) will ALWAYS end up casting their spells successfully. This isn't right to me. Magic is often described as a dangerous pursuit in the novels by WOTC, yet the game itself makes it very safe to use magic in D&D.