Spellcasting Sacred Cows

[MarkChevallier]

I've had the 20 minute day in my groups, and I'm a pushover as a DM. I never kill characters except for 1 TPK in a 4E game simply due to the dice. In my games the 20 minute day comes from the deep immersion style we play in. The players are genuinely worried about what is in that cave, but as long as it isn't coming out and doesn't have reinforcements, they do the logical thing. It isn't, however, the best for fun or story.

But realistically, especially if facing an intelligent opponent, a 15 minute adventuring day just gives your enemy time to outmanouever and out gun you. It's a losing strategy if you're playing realistically. The enemy gathers his strength and either throws everything at you while you rest or in the first area you return to, or simply ups sticks and leaves the area.

In any kind of dynamic, consequence based game, stopping doing everything after 15 minutes (which also implies that your magic users simply use their magic constantly, without husbanding their resources for when it's most needed), is an invitation to utter defeat.

 

[MarkChevallier]

Personally, I think your first point is the real problem inherent in the vancian system (and yes, I realize that for some play styles it is not a problem). That, and the vast scope of the system.

Combine the two and you can find a way to automatically win in almost any situation. It's worst with divine casters, because you can at least limit a wizards via his spellbook. However, clerics and druids can memorize any spell from any book you allow at your table.

You're not wrong, but I like my players to win! That's what they're there to do. Let it be a challenge, but I think challenge is still retained even when clever casting can circumvent issues and overcome them.

Lastly there's the issue of niche infringement. Casters should not have access to spells like Tenser's Transformation and Divine Power, that allow them to take over the role of another class, particularly when they can layer multiple buffs to be better than the class in question.

I totally agree here; this has been a hot potato in recent years, so I think the designers will be aware of and prevent niches being totally trampled on.

Your second point is about more tightly controlling limited resources. IMO, far worse than the 15 minute adventure day are scrolls and wands (particularly the crafting thereof). These allow the caster to flagrantly disregard the very limits that supposedly make him balanced.

Scrolls and wands being very easily craftable and wieldable is a bad thing, when it is abused. I personally didn't see it in 3E until late in the edition's life, at which point several bright sparks in groups I played began spamming wands of cure light wounds. That was no-fun, I agree.

I think that there are a lot of bright minds on the design team and that they'll be able to work around these issues by merely trimming the fat from a few sacred cows. I think we'll see magic that is a little more usable at 1st level (more than 1 or 2 spell slots) but spells will also be less likely to succeed automatically. Not necessarily a caster check, but rather that something like Invisibility won't render you nearly impossible to find. I also expect that we'll see more tightly restricted spell lists. If they get the mix just right, I expect they can make parties on both sides of the divide happy.

I disagree with your proposed solution, but agree with your intended outcome. I always think magic that does replicate what others can do - knock, charm person etc - has a place, but it's utility has to be balanced by a downside which makes it the second option to more mundane means. Perhaps charmed victims should get increased saves to the effect over time, and when it wears off, hate you. Perhaps knock should create a massive noise when cast. That kind of thing.

 

[Number48]

But realistically, especially if facing an intelligent opponent, a 15 minute adventuring day just gives your enemy time to outmanouever and out gun you. It's a losing strategy if you're playing realistically. The enemy gathers his strength and either throws everything at you while you rest or in the first area you return to, or simply ups sticks and leaves the area.

In any kind of dynamic, consequence based game, stopping doing everything after 15 minutes (which also implies that your magic users simply use their magic constantly, without husbanding their resources for when it's most needed), is an invitation to utter defeat.

That depends on the situation, doesn't it. Very little consequence if the "dungeon" is a crypt of mindless undead. Also if the cave is filled with light-sensitive baddies who can be counted on to stay inside if you rest during the day.

I DO have the baddies, if they have any intelligence, shore up defenses and lay traps, etc. but that doesn't compare to the power of spells of even 3rd level. To do more than is reasonable for the baddies is to punish the players for good strategy. Although, I have also had an entire tribe of goblins simply abandon the warren and take most of the treasure with them after suffering 2 nasty strikes.

 

[Number48]

For the niche protection angle, I would like to see it addressed by "fuzzy" abilities. I fighter, wizard or rogue can get an ability, spell or whatever for opening locks. These are all governed with the mechanics of the exact same ability, but leave it to the player to describe how it is accomplished. Therefore, picking a lock, smashing a lock and a knock spell are all functionally the same with different descriptions. So maybe the wizard in the group opens the locks and the rogue gets that job freed up to take something else. The important thing, mechanically, is to cover as many bases as possible in capabilities but it doesn't really matter who has which ability as long as it's pretty evenly divided in the group.

I only give this a 15% chance of happening, but it's how I'm going to design my own system if I hate 5E.

 

[Tilenas]

I think we'll see magic that is a little more usable at 1st level (more than 1 or 2 spell slots) but spells will also be less likely to succeed automatically. Not necessarily a caster check, but rather that something like Invisibility won't render you nearly impossible to find. I also expect that we'll see more tightly restricted spell lists. If they get the mix just right, I expect they can make parties on both sides of the divide happy.

I always think magic that does replicate what others can do - knock, charm person etc - has a place, but it's utility has to be balanced by a downside which makes it the second option to more mundane means. Perhaps charmed victims should get increased saves to the effect over time, and when it wears off, hate you. Perhaps knock should create a massive noise when cast. That kind of thing.

That's in fact what I had in mind when I was talking about introducing a caster check: Spells that are useful, but come with some kind of catch or quirk. Like near-invisiblity. Like sonic knock. Whether that's hard coded into the spell's discription or depending on a check result is another question, but I would prefer either to the current state, where magic is near always the most elegant and reliable way to solve a problem.

 

[MINI]

The first issue can be adressed by introducing some sort of aiming or generalized casting check, be it for area damage spells like fireball, or spells like charm person. I am not talking about reversing the save 4e-style by having casters roll against a static defense. I would like to see some kind of mechanic that determines how well the spell is cast (like a concentration or spellcraft check) before any saves are made. That's more dice rolling, but lends more mystery to magic in general.

Your talking about 'not so wild but slightly wild' magic of sorts. I would tend to agree with this though that while a 20th level wizard should be able to cast a a fireball without much error a 5th level caster might go to do so and instead make the targets hair really long (ooops!). This would add a great deal of humor to the game and effect spelll selection. Reason I say it might affect spell selection is that there are certain spells like detect magic that might not have a 'wild' factor while certainly evocation spells should have a 'wild' factor. Other spells like Web might not have the wild factor and this would encourage some creative spell selection instead of always taking fireballs and magic missile.

The second issue is closely tied to vancian magic. Full recovery after resting is kind of required, because: How do you introduce an easy and reliable method for partial spell recovery if your Cleric can cast 5/4+1/3+1/3+1/1+1 spells? I have no idea. But I would LOVE to see spellcasters that have to be more careful with their magical resources. DSA, for instance, uses spell points which are recovered just like hit points. More powerful casters regain their spell points more quickly, but it's all within the same ballpark. All of a sudden, it makes sense to conserve your energy, because left-over spells are not wasted as they are now.

I think this could be solved by a combination of a daily study requirement but also by implementing a hp requirement to cast a spell. Its the old story of a caster feeling 'fatigued' when he casts a spell. Channeling magic is hard on the body. Of course starting mages would need more hp to do this and you could also add something in that a magic user could sacrifice one memorized spell in order to have enough constitution left to cast the one he needs if his hp or low but at least there is a physical price associated with casting. This kind of revival mechanic would make casting spells more risky.

 

[steeldragons]

Type: Conjuration
Level: 3
Casting time: 4 segments
Area of Effect: 10' radius plus 5' per caster level
Duration: Instantaneous
Components: Verbal , Material, Somatic

Description: The Sacred Cows spell immediately summons forth d4 fully grown Burmese Bulls in mid-air that are flung in the direction of the target area of effect. Reflex saves are allowed to avoid being hit by the blasting bovines.

Those struck take 10d10 damage and are knocked prone and stunned for d4 rounds but are also Blessed (as the spell) at the same time. Additional saves against magic apply for half damage by those who are hit. The Blessing effect lasts for d6 rounds.

The caster may opt to direct each Sacred Cow to a different target within the area of effect.

Material component: an oxtail; Somatic & Verbal: hold one's index fingers up to the sides of their head, pointing upward, and incant "Mooo" three times.

------------------
Just the first thing that came to mind when I read the thread title...moving on...

There are other systems that do "magic doesn't always work" or "magic has unusual/unexpected effects". D&D is not one of those systems. Never has been. Never should be in "RAW". Different groups/DMs who want to incorporate that "level" into the spellcasting/magic of their campaign worlds are free make up their own system to do so...or borrow/import from a system that already does.

There were, once upon a time, casting time and spell disruption rules....so, in fact, one's magic did not "always work" as expected/might not "get off in time" before the wizard was being struck...and even the stupidest of creatures knew that when the guy in the robes starts talking funny and waving his arms...HIT HIM (if you could)!

As for the "15 minute adventuring day"...that's just something that certain gamers do/did. That falls to the DMs to either get them moving, interrupt their rest, or something to prevent it...or allow it if they didn't care. Wandering Monsters, anyone?

It was certainly NOT a "sacred cow" of D&D magic use. That's a playstyle thing...amongst "powergamers" or "min-maxers" or whatever they are called if I had to guess.

There's my two cows...er...coppers.
--SD

 

[gyor]

There is nothing wrong with how 4e handled, why change that part, it worked well.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

There is nothing wrong with how 4e handled, why change that part, it worked well.

Please elaborate. 4e has the attack and utility spells with At-Will, encounter and dailies, and then you added rituals on top of that. Are you saying that this is the mechanic that worked well? It really didn't work for me.

My limited 4e experience is that Daily powers still could create the 20 minute adventuring day problem with some groups. But where it broke down for me was the "mundaneness" of spells. I'll fire off another at-will spell. OK, I'll do it again. More? Here you go.

For me the specialness of spellcasters was in making choices. Do I cast now, or do I wait for a better situation? Can the fighters prevail or should I toss my last 4th level spell for the day and finish this now? I was perfectly OK with the idea that perhaps I couldn't do something every round, but when I did, I knew it would make a difference.

 

[Tilenas]

As for the "15 minute adventuring day"...that's just something that certain gamers do/did. That falls to the DMs to either get them moving, interrupt their rest, or something to prevent it...or allow it if they didn't care. Wandering Monsters, anyone?

It was certainly NOT a "sacred cow" of D&D magic use. That's a playstyle thing...amongst "powergamers" or "min-maxers" or whatever they are called if I had to guess.

There's my two cows...er...coppers.
--SD

True enough. Wandering monsters make a heck of sense. But then again, the party Wizard will have a rope trick or some other spell prepared to keep the party out of their reach. Now, suddenly, the DM has to have Wizards or guards with anti-magic-rods patrol the area, which is much less probable in your average dungeon. Seriously, I've seen my share of different playstyles, but seemingly all had in common that, given the chance, the party would use failsafe methods against nasty surprises.