Scaling spells by spell level

[Argyle King]

In 3E and earlier editions, a caster was not nearly as good at using magic items as a fighter. Give both more gear, and a fighter gains power relative to the wizard. So, if you want to have a gear.neutral power scaling, you have to change things so that wizards benefit as much from their gear as fighters do. Until you do that, expected wealth level has to be a part of the power equation.

And it turns out that is quite tricky to do, because the same bonus applied to different classes works out very differently. A bonus of +1 damage per attack is a lot better if you have several attacks (like the fighter), and an increase in AC is more valuable if you start out at a better AC and get attacked more (again like a fighter).

This is one of the things 4E did better than previous editions, introducing implements.

Going back tot he basic discussion, I'd say spells should still auto scale, because even without magic items, fighters also auto scale. And without some kind of scaling damage (and assuming scaling hp), fights will get very slow.

I strongly disagree with the part I bolded. Both sorcerer and bard have charisma as a primary stat; charisma is what is used for Use Magic Device, and (if I recall correctly) Use Magic Device is a class skill for both of them. It's been quite a while since I have played 3rd, but I believe that means that both of those classes can trick magic items into working for them; even items which they would not normally be able to use.

Also, keep in mind that a caster doesn't need a weapon or armor. The magic they have comes from them. This means they can instead take the money which would be spent on those items to buy other things for the part such as a wand of a healing spell; nystul's marvelous pigments (which are extremely useful), and others.

A third point to bring up is what happens when items are removed. There are numerous scenarios in which you may not have access to items. In such a scenario, the fighter becomes a commoner with a better BAB and a bunch of feats. The caster still has all of his power.

I think reducing item dependency is something D&D needs to put more effort into.

 

[Sadrik]

Why do you want to bring back the 5min workday?
Because when a fighters at-will sword swings are comparable to a daily spell slot, that's the only way a caster can possibly keep up.

Excellent point. I think the base game needs full vancian magic but I think that rules modules in this arena need to exist out of the gate. To allow more flexibility for DMs and players alike. That said the game should be initially balanced to vancian. Why do that? IMHO, this would allow someone to pick up an old module and run it without too much conversion.

 

[Sadrik]

I have no problem with limited magic missiles.

Me too, as to the other stuff, it is a trap to have an unlimited super weak resource. I would rather have the wizard throw darts or daggers, whack with a staff every now and then. Flatter math makes this a real option. These are unlimited resources (albeit ammunition limited).

In fact I like this:
memorize MM
as a 0 level spell and it deals 1d4+1
as a 1st 3d4 +3
as a 2nd 5d4+5

Blam, MM and workable.

 

[Sadrik]

No, it doesn't. LF/QW is caused by more powerful options for wizards, not autoscaling. The 3e wizard isn't overpowered because his fireball does 5d6 more damage at 10th level than it did at 5th leve; the 3e wizard is overpowered because his enemies are one saving throw away from being turned into minions or statues or corpses. Not to mention the capacity to teleport thousands of miles in the blink of an eye...and that's what he can do halfway through his career.

I agree and this has got to be a function of re-leveling some of the more powerful effects.

Late in 3e I creating my own spell progression charts, making new spell levels attained every 3rd level instead of every 2nd level.

For instance:
Instead of new spell levels attained at 1/3/5/7/9/11/etc they were gained at 1/3/6/9/12/15/etc which was more like the 2e spell charts. This effectively pushed 8th and 9th level spells into 21st level plus. I also boosted up the number of spells received so that casters had the same number of spells castable, just not as high of level. This was a very effective strategy as 5th level spells are generally the game breakers and they do not arrive until 12th level as opposed to 9th level.

 

[Obryn]

No, it doesn't. LF/QW is caused by more powerful options for wizards, not autoscaling. The 3e wizard isn't overpowered because his fireball does 5d6 more damage at 10th level than it did at 5th leve; the 3e wizard is overpowered because his enemies are one saving throw away from being turned into minions or statues or corpses. Not to mention the capacity to teleport thousands of miles in the blink of an eye...and that's what he can do halfway through his career.

It's both, clearly.

Not only is the wizard turning his enemies to stone with his higher-level slots, but (1) he keeps his lower level slots for added utility and flexibility, and (2) his lower-level ones stay viable and useful in part due to this autoscaling. Fireball's not a great option, sure, but it's a less-great option at 10th if it's doing 5d6 instead of 10d6. And maybe when you got 2nd level spells it was Glitterdust all the way, but when you're flinging 5th-level spells around, knock and rope trick become basically free. (That's if you weren't smart and just put them on a scroll like you should have.) When you add in metamagic, it's even clearer - it takes a higher-level slot to prepare or cast, sure, but that spell you're enhancing wouldn't be nearly as appealing if it didn't scale.

My favorite example of autoscaling gone wrong is from 1e - chromatic orb. Really, magic missile can get egregious, but this took the cake. At 1st level, it was pretty lame; minor damage and the guy you hit gets glowy. At 9th level, though, if you hit it paralyzes someone if they succeed on their save but kill them outright if they fail.

-O