Modifying the AU casting system

[Terraism]

(Not sure if this should be here or in House Rules, but...)

So, I've been running an AU game for about two months now, fulfilling my desire to do so from about five minutes after I purchased the book last summer. There's not much I don't love about the system - but there is a little.

The magic system - most people that play AU, I think, like it more than the standard D&D casting system, and I agree... for the most part. My only issue is the automatic knowledge of all spells of a given type that AU characters have. I've always loved the feel of throwing a spellcaster at my players who's tossing spells that they've never seen before at them, and while I can do that in AU with exotic spells, I don't always want unique spells to require a feat. So I was thinking of limiting the spells known of the AU casters - by default, anyway. I realize that AU casters are a bit better balanced against noncasters than in core D&D, so I don't want to weaken them too much. That in mind, how's this sound?

Casters start - at first level - knowing a small number of spells, modified by those the class would have access to (complex vs only simple). At every level increase, they learn a few extra spells, of the highest level they can cast. Similar to core D&D Wizards. The can learn new spells through several methods, however (listed below, in order of increasing difficulty.)

• Direct tuition from another caster of the same type. (I like the idea that, though everyone can cast the same spells, they all do it differently, and therefore can't directly train one another; any thoughts on this?) Learn the spell with a successful Spellcraft check, DC 10 + spell level.
• Studying a scroll or some other written description of the spell. Learn the spell with a successful Spellcraft check, DC 15 + spell level.
• Witness a spell being cast. Requires a Spellcraft check to identify the spell, as normal. (This allows them to realize they don't know it.) They may then make an additional Spellcraft check, DC 15 + (2 * spell level) to learn the spell.

I'm also thinking of allowing a readied action to study a spell being cast to add +4 to the Spellcraft check to learn the spell, though I'd like to use it in practice a bit. Also a possibilty would be a +2 bonus to the spellcraft check for each time they witness the spell being cast.

These changes in mind, what do you think? I don't think it'll weaken the spellcasters overmuch, as spells aren't that hard to learn (no monetary costs, like in the core rules, either.) My only real question is how many spells to give at start, and how many at each additional level. I'm leaning towards the standard wizard method - 3 + casting stat mod at 1st level and an extra 2 per level, but... any comments?

 

[Terraism]

[Poke.] C'mon, folks - it's driftin' towards the bottom of the main page, got near forty views, and not a single post, even to say "it sucks?" I'm hurt.

In other words... {BUMP!}

 

[Varianor Abroad]

...My only issue is the automatic knowledge of all spells of a given type that AU characters have. I've always loved the feel of throwing a spellcaster at my players who's tossing spells that they've never seen before at them, and while I can do that in AU with exotic spells, I don't always want unique spells to require a feat. So I was thinking of limiting the spells known of the AU casters - by default, anyway. I realize that AU casters are a bit better balanced against noncasters than in core D&D, so I don't want to weaken them too much. That in mind, how's this sound?

....
These changes in mind, what do you think? I don't think it'll weaken the spellcasters overmuch, as spells aren't that hard to learn (no monetary costs, like in the core rules, either.) My only real question is how many spells to give at start, and how many at each additional level. I'm leaning towards the standard wizard method - 3 + casting stat mod at 1st level and an extra 2 per level, but... any comments?

My first observation is that standard D&D has this problem too . If the players have access to the PH, then there's little in the way of surprises that a villain can throw at them. So why reduce the availability of spells, when that's actually the stock in trade of the AU casters? Spell templates are what gives a spell a twist. An electric mudball or a cold fireburst (uh, eldritch blast) were pretty surprising to my players. There's also exotic spells out there which are only available if you pay a feat for them. Pretty rare to do that.

My second observation is that there's lots of product out there (Complete Book of Eldritch Might, Book of Hallowed Might II, etc) with AU conversions for new, never-before-seen spells to shock your players with. Consider picking those up instead of limiting their options.

What this really does is limit the amount of spells into the game, allowing the DM to prepare better to foil them with NPC and monster abilities, items and their own spells. (I'm not saying that you're doing this, by the way, just noting that it reduces the amount of spells that you have to worry about.)

I don't think it adds to the game from the player's perspective. It forces them all to be more like sorcerers, with the added detriment that they have fewer spells to cast per day than a sorcerer. Instead of the variety of options that I see players choosing, you'll get a humdrum selection of the same combat spells for every caster because those are the must-haves.

Have you asked your players about this by the way? What do they think?

All that being said, if you really still want a mechanism, I'd go with double or treble their spells readied per day per level as the number known automatically. Then you can add the learning chances. Your learning methods seem fine, if you're going to implement this system.

 

[drnuncheon]

I've been pondering this, when I've been thinking about converting the AU magic system to use in a more traditional D&D setting. I, too, would like to keep the image of wizards trading spells, the finding of another wizard's spellbook being a treasure, etc.

One thing I'm considering is leaving the base AU spells as 'common knowledge' - they're the spells people know of and think of. Spells from other sources (like the Complete Book of Eldritch Might) are rarer and not commonly known.

These rarer spells are not necessarily exotic (that is, requiring a feat) - rather, they could be simple or complex spells that not everyone has the 'notes' for. Should a caster discover such a spell, and be able to cast the requisite type of spells, then he would be free to add it to his spell list (with the appropriate feat expenditure should it be an exotic spell, or a complex spell found by a non-magister with no other extenuating circumstances.)

J

 

[Terraism]

My first observation is that standard D&D has this problem too . If the players have access to the PH, then there's little in the way of surprises that a villain can throw at them. So why reduce the availability of spells, when that's actually the stock in trade of the AU casters?

Because in core D&D, wizards don't have every spell available - meaning that they can fight a wizard that throws a spell at them they don't have.

Spell templates are what gives a spell a twist. An electric mudball or a cold fireburst (uh, eldritch blast) were pretty surprising to my players. There's also exotic spells out there which are only available if you pay a feat for them. Pretty rare to do that.

True enough, but the problem with so many of those templates is cost - not just laden, but every one of those electric mudballs costs 30 gp - which means that to introduce anything the players haven't seen, spellwise, costs so much a pop. I don't like that idea much - because, reasonably, no individual is going to turn every mudball into an electric one.

My second observation is that there's lots of product out there (Complete Book of Eldritch Might, Book of Hallowed Might II, etc) with AU conversions for new, never-before-seen spells to shock your players with. Consider picking those up instead of limiting their options.

Got 'em. (Well, the Complete Book, anyway. Didn't realize Hallowed Might II had new ones.) Thing is once I allow the spells - whoa, they've got 'em, and they're suddenly nothing special. As a general rule, I don't like allowing a book of material for my NPC's, but not the players - so if I allow the spells in there, the players get them all too. And, viola, new and never-before-seen are gone, since they have access to all spells.

What this really does is limit the amount of spells into the game, allowing the DM to prepare better to foil them with NPC and monster abilities, items and their own spells. (I'm not saying that you're doing this, by the way, just noting that it reduces the amount of spells that you have to worry about.)

That's a good point, though I hadn't even thought of that. I just want some feeling of new on the part of the characters, which I can't get with the "everyone knows them all" mindset.

I don't think it adds to the game from the player's perspective. It forces them all to be more like sorcerers, with the added detriment that they have fewer spells to cast per day than a sorcerer. Instead of the variety of options that I see players choosing, you'll get a humdrum selection of the same combat spells for every caster because those are the must-haves.

Hm. At the low levels, I haven't really seen a lot of versatility. I've only got quasi-casters, though, which might have something to with it - an unfettered/greenbond, a witch, and a mageblade. They all seem to be grabbing the same spells every day at this level (2nd,) because they can't ready very many in the first place. The greenbond - and witch - both ready Mudball. Every time. The mageblade tends to go with Acrobatics and Animate Weapon. Since I wasn't planning on capping their known spells, my feelings were that, by the time they can ready enough spells that they'd be branching out anyway, they ought to have learned a number from other sources.

Have you asked your players about this by the way? What do they think?

Some - the greenbond and mageblade, anyway. The player of the greenbond is all for it, and the mageblade is a newbie, so his opinion was "go with whatever you think'll be better."

All that being said, if you really still want a mechanism, I'd go with double or treble their spells readied per day per level as the number known automatically. Then you can add the learning chances. Your learning methods seem fine, if you're going to implement this system.

Hm. Given how few spells that a character can have readied, with the exception of Greenbonds and Magister, I think that, in the early levels, ~4 + 2/level will probably allow them more flexibility than even triple their spells readied.

Thanks for all the feedback - gave me some angles I hadn't thought of to consider.

 

[Staffan]

Another option is to make Exotic Spell a little more attractive. I'm considering a house rule that lets you get Int-bonus (minimum 1) exotic spells for one feat. Or rather, it would give you the potential to learn that many. You still have to actually locate and find the spells.

So, let's say we have a starting magister with Int 16. As one of his starting feats, he chooses Exotic Spell, in order to learn mage^h^h^h^heldritch armor. He now has two "free" exotic spell slots that he can fill with weird spells he comes across during his adventuring.

 

[Rel]

Another option is to make Exotic Spell a little more attractive. I'm considering a house rule that lets you get Int-bonus (minimum 1) exotic spells for one feat. Or rather, it would give you the potential to learn that many. You still have to actually locate and find the spells.

So, let's say we have a starting magister with Int 16. As one of his starting feats, he chooses Exotic Spell, in order to learn mage^h^h^h^heldritch armor. He now has two "free" exotic spell slots that he can fill with weird spells he comes across during his adventuring.

While I agree that paying a feat for a single Exotic Spell seems a little steep, I wouldn't implement in the manner you are suggesting. It heavily favors Magisters and Runethanes. If you made it based on the primary spellcasting stat bonus instead of strictly Int, that would be more fair. But it might also be overpowered. My 2nd level Verrik Mind Witch has a 20 Wis and therefore would get 5 Exotic spells for the price of one feat. That seems a bit much.

As to the OP, I haven't played much AU (2 one off games and we had the first session of a campaign last night) but it seems like it might not really have that much of an impact. What I mean is this: Each spellcaster will have access to all the simple or complex spells of a given level (depending on the class and feats they take) but there is really only a relatively small subset of those spells that "work" for that character. For example, the low Str, high Dex Spryte Magister will probably focus on spells that improve his AC, keep foes at bay and let him attack from range (he probably doesn't have a lot of hit points and can't wear much in the way of armor). He probably won't use a lot of melee touch attack spells or things like Acrobatics (he doesn't really need it most of the time), Animate Weapon (his BAB kind of stinks), Safe Fall (doesn't need it much since he can fly) and my not cast Transfer Wounds much (he doesn't have the Hit Points to withstand the subdual damage very well). If you look at the set of spells this PC commonly readies, even allowing for some variation based on unusual circumstances he knows are coming, the list will probably be no more than about a third of the spells that he actually has access to.

If you are talking about limiting the available spells to less than a third of the standard selection per the rules as written, you might be excessively cutting into the power of the spellcasters. But if you don't limit it to something close to that, then I doubt the PC's will even feel much of a pinch.

Here's a very off-the-cuff suggestion that I have not considered all the ramifications of (so be warned), but what if:

1) You introduce a new spell via an NPC

2) Any of the PC spellcasters may make a Spellcraft check to try and comprehend it. Set the base DC at something like 20+Spell Level. This might be modified by how much exposure they have to the spell and to any materials that might aid them in learning it. If they've seen it cast once, apply a -10 to the roll. Lower that penalty by 2 each successive time they see the spell cast. If they have access to the notes from when the spell was originally created, give them a +4 to the check.

3) If they make the Spellcraft check, they can learn the spell as an Exotic by spending the requisite feat. If they make the check by more than 5 then let them treat the spell as though it were a Complex spell of its level. If they make the check by more than 10 then let them treat it as though it were a simple spell of its level.

4) Let them attempt the check again if they gain new ranks in Spellcraft or if they find more materials that explain how the spell works.

In this way, the dedicated spellcasters, and particularly the Magister (who's supposed to be the best at this sort of thing) are more likely to be able to use the spell and use it easily than say the Mageblade would. And I also think it keeps with the flavor of the system and how it describes magic and spells as working.

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

I don't think it's so much a problem as it is a very different manifestation of a highly traditional concept. AU casters have to take feats to gain access to new spells, which is very different from DnD, where casters either learn a few spells inherently, know all spells from their gods (or nature, or what have you), or can learn spells with the appropriate skill check. Obviously any of these methods is much preferred to spending a precious feat slot.

But I think the expenditure of a feat slot really helps bring AU casters in line with other non-spellcasting classes. One of the many mantras I've heard often from AU players is that AU class power scales on a far more linear level, whereas DnD classes scale at an exponential level. Reading the classes on paper, I'd definitely agree with this (haven't progressed far enough in my AU game to be able to judge definitely). Spending a feat is just the way they do it in AU.

But I think it's more than that as well. I think the AU classes are precisely balanced against one another mechanically. Casters need to spend feats in order to increase their flexibility, just like any other class. If an unfettered wants an extra attack, he needs a feat (Rapid Strike). If a Magister wants Eldritch Armor, he needs a feat (Exotic Spell). It feels strange, and I admit I was hesitant about it at first. But I think this does much more to bridge the power gap between the melee and caster classes. It's the best--perhaps the only--solution I've seen for that problem.

 

[Varianor Abroad]

I don't think it's so much a problem as it is a very different manifestation of a highly traditional concept. ...Spending a feat is just the way they do it in AU....

Excellent point.

What it sounds like Terraism is unhappiness with simple spells. There's fewer of them available than having simple and complex together. If your PCs take a few feats (like elemental mage, for example) that expand their repertoire, then they and you will have more available to experiment with. By the way, if you introduce a complex, non-positive energy spell from CBoEM or BoHM II, your players can't learn it.

I'd actually suggest a few villains having Use Magic Device and some scrolls, charms, detonations or tokens of a few complex spells. That gets at what you want, and if the PCs beat them, a few fall into their hands to incent them to purchase more feats. (Taking Complex Spell for 3rd level spells is the most combat bang for the buck by the way.)

Finally, with respect to Exotic Spell, I put together a few options you may want to consider before giving out extra spells per feat.

 

[Terraism]

What it sounds like Terraism is unhappiness with simple spells. There's fewer of them available than having simple and complex together. If your PCs take a few feats (like elemental mage, for example) that expand their repertoire, then they and you will have more available to experiment with. By the way, if you introduce a complex, non-positive energy spell from CBoEM or BoHM II, your players can't learn it.

Point, though I like the idea of the PC's learning some of the neat, never-before-heard-of spells that the enemies toss around. (This is probably due a bit to the fact that I don't tend to give out a lot of "treasure," meaning that they might not get much otherwise - this is a seperate matter, though.)

I'd actually suggest a few villains having Use Magic Device and some scrolls, charms, detonations or tokens of a few complex spells. That gets at what you want, and if the PCs beat them, a few fall into their hands to incent them to purchase more feats. (Taking Complex Spell for 3rd level spells is the most combat bang for the buck by the way.)

Good ideas - I think I underuse UMD, so I hadn't even considered that.

Finally, with respect to Exotic Spell, I put together a few options you may want to consider before giving out extra spells per feat.

Saw 'em. I like the site - generally my second stop every Tuesday. (Second RPG stop, anyway - after here. I have to check my webcomics before I do anything else...)