Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Roguedeus" data-source="post: 6136175" data-attributes="member: 6695751">First please understand that I am a dabbler in D&D, and RPG's in general. I rarely get to play them, but have been a lover of them for some 24+ years now. I do not claim to be an expert, I am only asking for feedback on the viability, or necessity, of some minor changes to the way that magic is utilized during play. If this is a subject that has been addressed Ad-nauseam, I apologize. I do not frequent this forum as much as I probably should. ...THE ISSUE: I am sure that many would say that my definition lacks nuance, but for the sake of clarity I am paraphrasing as simply as I can.There seems to be a consensus, however tenuous, that the Warrior/Caster  dichotomy is being exacerbated with D&DNEXT, as it was in 3rd Ed. The issue seems to be that Warrior types (Fighters, Rogues, Etc...) are gear bound with abilities that scale very flatly, while Caster types (Wizards, Druids, Etc...) can level almost naked and still quickly make Warrior types superfluous via a combination of Cantrips and abilities that are far more versatile, while scaling Quadratically. The challenge is how to add a sense of balance to casters, without ruining their overall utility, and enhancing the desire of non-caster alternatives in contrast....Again, for the sake of keeping this as digestible as possible, I will attempt to simplify my suggested solution.A SOLUTION?:First: ALL spell/like abilities, that utilize slots, (even those used by Sorcerers) should consume some kind of spell component and/or an implements charge (wands, staves). I suggest a simple 'generic' form of component/charge with rarity levels, such as mundane, uncommon, and rare. Thus a common 1st level spell would consume 1 mundane spell component from the wizards component count, or 1 mundane charge from their current implement. A 2nd level spell might consume 2 mundane components, while a 7th level spell may consume 3 uncommon and 1 rare component!  Note: More powerful spells (or scaled spells) utilize more/rarer components/charges.Second: All spell/like abilities, that utilize slots, (even those used by Sorcerers) should require a charged implement (such as a wand or staff) with stats that the spells primary effects and 'scalability' are based off of (like a swords damage, a bows range and ammunition like arrows). Cantrips can be used as impromptu implements (reduced stats based on the Cantrip), but with no scalability (i.e. no multiple components/charges, thus only the simplest spells). Note: Perhaps special kinds of Cantrips require a spell slot to function, removing that slot from normal casting use.Special: For those rare cases where a caster is without their component pouch or implement (relying on Cantrip as an implement), they can use a skill that allows them to improvise components, with whats on hand (with appropriate circumstance adjustments) or risk losing the spell/slot....CLOSING: I think this solution will work for most cases of disparity by allowing the DM to reign in the auto scaling, non-gear dependent, nature of casters and force them to endure the at least SOME of the necessities of melee based classes. Components are on par with ammunition, and can be found as loots. The utility of the casters items (wand/staff) is made more on par with melee weapons, for spell/ability effectiveness. And the possible removal of both, relegates that caster to a significantly sub par actor, in accordance with a non-caster character who's lost their gear.In contrast, a rogue (or other non-caster) that has some spell like utility without the need of actual spells, is even more desirable for those moments where the wizard is without implement or components, or when they simply don't want to expend them.Keep in mind that this will also require a minor tweak to the nature of spell scaling. Instead of being based on caster level, it will be based on implement stats, just like non-casters are. Where a spell might say DC 10 +1 per caster level, it would now be DC 10 +2 per implement bonus. Or some equivalent. Ranged spells would also depend on the implements range, like an archer would use a bow. Also, spells would need to explicitly state what type of implement is necessary to cast the spell. Some may only use wands with a minimum bonus, others only a staff. This would be the most difficult part of this solution.Thanks for your time.</blockquote>

Verification