Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Rod Staffwand" data-source="post: 7475844" data-attributes="member: 6776279">Everything else in D&D doesn't require a roll. Activating class features never does (at least I can't think of any). Action surge? No roll. Spending ki? No roll. Barbarian raging? No roll. Inspiration dice? No roll. Spells are essentially features of the character, in the same vein as these other abilities. Sure, players may make rolls as part of the activation (such as a fighter making a secondary attack roll with an action surge or rerolling a save with indomitable), but not TO activate their ability. Spells are simply a major subset of these types of features.So the rules parity argument doesn't hold much water.On the other hand, you may find the D&D magic system to be overly reliable and lacking in any sort of mystery, danger or wonder. These are valid criticisms shared by many players. D&D has long embraced functional magic over flavorful magic as a core design choice. It has creaked along with only minor tweaking for close to 50 years so I guess they think it's working all right.Rolling for spell casting would certainly make casting less reliable and can work in theory. Other systems have done it. You would need to figure out:1) The spellcasting DC. Let's say 8+spell level.2) The casting roll. Let's say casting stat + PB.3) Special rules. Does a 1 always fail? Does a nat 20 get you anything? Can you spend more time (say a minute) to get a a bonus? Can someone help you cast? What gives you advantage or disadvantage? How does it affect spell-slinging magic items?4) Spell failure. Do you lose the spell? Lose your action? Suffer a 'mystic backlash'? Roll on a crazy magic fumble table?If you make the rolls too easy, why bother with the extra system? If you make the rolls too hard you won't see many casters at your table. The same is true if the consequences for spell failure are particularly dangerous.In any case, it will likely make combats more tense as spells are no longer reliable. That could be fun. On the other hand, since spells aren't reliable, the players will not be able to strategize as much. Finally, spells that allow for a complete negation of all effect on a save or on a missed attack will drop in popularity as there are now twice as many failure points.These might all be acceptable trade-offs. However, it still won't make D&D magic any more mysterious or wondrous--just finicky and frustrating.</blockquote>

Verification