D&D 3E/3.5 Spells On Demand v1.1 (At-will spells in 3.5 Edition)

[Michael Silverbane]

Another thing that you might consider, in regards to healing magics, is to limit it on the other end. Sure, the cleric can cast cure light wounds as many times per day as he wants, but any given creature can only be healed of so much damage in a given interval (per encounter, per day, whatever). That could also use the UAs Reserve Points, theoretically...

Later
silver

 

[CleverNickName]

Here's something. I found out after a little playtesting that your healing system works well when combined with the Unearthed Arcana "Reserve Points" houserule. The basic idea is that you have a reservoir of "reserve hp" equal to your regular hp. And when you take hp damage the "Reserve hp" slowly replenishes your health at a rate of 1hp per minute. As an alteration to this house rule I have often made the hp regeneration equal to "Character level per minute". The big reason for this is so that it doesn't take 1st level characters 2 minutes to heal back to full and 15th level characters 2 hours.

Something to think on.

Thanks for the feedback...this is really helpful. I am always looking for new playtesters. \m/

So far, we have a couple of ways to handle what I'm calling the "Healing Bug."

1. Leave It Alone: The system works, so long as the party knows and understands that they will have limited access to healing magic, and plans accordingly. At low levels, the party will have to spend extra money on healing potions. At mid-levels, clerics and druids will have to craft wands for healing spells (remember, the restriction on Healing magic only applies to SPELLS...a druid can still empty a wand of cure moderate on the same fellow in five minutes if desired.) At high-levels, staffs of healing and rings of regeneration are good investments.

2. Allow more uses: Develop a way to allow a healer to cast Healing spells on the same creature more than once per day. This could probably be done with a feat:

Improved Healing [General]
You are renowned for your healing powers.
Benefit: You may now affect the same creature up to twice per day with the same [Healing] spell.
Special: clerics with access to the Healing Domain gain this feat for free as a bonus feat. This bonus feat replaces the Healing Domain's granted power.

This essentially doubles the amount of healing spells available to casters. It helps low-level healers out a lot, but becomes too good at high levels, when clerics gain access to the heal spell.

3. Skill-based healing: Allow spells with the [Healing] descriptor to be cast through the Heal skill. In effect, the character uses the Heal skill to perform a ritual that emulates the effect of any [Healing] spell of 4th level or lower. The DC for this Heal check is 15 + (2 x spell level)), as shown:

Cure minor wounds: Heal DC 15
Cure light wounds: Heal DC 17
Cure moderate wounds: Heal DC 19
Cure serious wounds: Heal DC 21
Cure critical wounds: Heal DC 23
Delay poison: Heal DC 19
Lesser restoration: Heal DC 19
Neutralize poison: Heal DC 23
Remove blindness/deafness: Heal DC 21
Remove disease: Heal DC 21
Remove paralysis: Heal DC 19
Restoration: Heal DC 23

Using a Heal check in this manner requires at least 10 minutes per level of the spell being emulated, and cannot be used for spells higher than 4th level. The character performing the ritual must have at least the same number of hit dice as the caster level required to cast the spell, and must have a Wisdom score of at least 10 + the spell level.

That's all I've been able to come up with this week...and I've got to be honest, I think the best solution is also the easiest one. (Number 1.)

I want to avoid making the Reserve Points system from Pathfinder a requirement to this system, however. Reserve Points are great, and I definitely want people to have the option to use them with my Spells On Demand system without unbalancing their game, but I don't want them to be a hard requirement. Some people might want to use SoD without RPs.

Again, thanks for the feedback! I'll put a blurb in the next revision about Reserve Points, suggesting that they be used to help parties with a healing problem.

 

[deanruel]

Improved Healing [General]
You are renowned for your healing powers.
Benefit: You may now affect the same creature up to twice per day with the same [Healing] spell.
Special: clerics with access to the Healing Domain gain this feat for free as a bonus feat. This bonus feat replaces the Healing Domain's granted power.

This essentially doubles the amount of healing spells available to casters. It helps low-level healers out a lot, but becomes too good at high levels, when clerics gain access to the heal spell.

This problem could be ameliorated fairly easily by saying you could "Affect the same creature up to twice per day with the same Cure spell" and specify that it applies only to the cure family.

Indeed if you wanted to just give a slight boost you might do better to have a feat which allows you to affect a creature up to twice per day with the "Highest level" cure spell they have. This might prove to be a real boost in and of itself and might be small enough to even allow Heal to be used as well. Two heals a day is a big deal but it's nothing regular clerics of equivalent levels couldn't do. Honestly the more I think about this feat method the more I think it might be the way to go. Simple, low impact, and easy to use and understand. All signs of good houserules.

 

[CleverNickName]

I'd say that the heal up to half HP an unlimited amount of times is fine.

Interesting idea...thanks for the tip! I'll toss it into the playtest pile, and see what it does for the balance. I'm skeptical, though...even at relatively low levels, it is like handing out infinite potions of cure moderate wounds. But maybe it tests better than it looks...it's happened before.

 

[CleverNickName]

Another thing that you might consider, in regards to healing magics, is to limit it on the other end. Sure, the cleric can cast cure light wounds as many times per day as he wants, but any given creature can only be healed of so much damage in a given interval (per encounter, per day, whatever).

Interesting idea, capping the amount of damage healed instead of the number of times the spell can be cast...this could be a step in the right direction to resolve the OTHER problem we are having with healing magic. Imagine how much fun this scenario is for the players:

Rogue is at 1 hp, goblins are closing in. The cleric prepares her only healing spell (cure light wounds) and casts it on the rogue...and then rolls a natural 1 on her d8. The rogue gets a whole whopping 2 hit points, and they have to last for the rest of the entire day.

Yeah, it's not a lot of fun. So, I think I am going to eliminate the random rolls for [Healing] spells. If these spells only work once per creature per day, they need to work to the best of their ability.

From this day forth:

Cure light wounds heals 8 + caster level (max +5) hit points.
Cure moderate wounds heals 16 + caster level (max +10) hit points.
Cure serious wounds heals 24 + caster level (max +15) hit points.
Cure critical wounds heals 32 + caster level (max +20) hit points.

Same goes for the "mass" versions. And heal, I suppose.

 

[Scurvy_Platypus]

Interesting idea...thanks for the tip! I'll toss it into the playtest pile, and see what it does for the balance. I'm skeptical, though...even at relatively low levels, it is like handing out infinite potions of cure moderate wounds. But maybe it tests better than it looks...it's happened before.

Interesting idea, capping the amount of damage healed instead of the number of times the spell can be cast...

I think you're misunderstanding my post. I'm not saying that a person that has 50 HP can get 25 HP healed an unlimited number of times.

Rather, the person starts with 50 HP and takes damage which drops them down to 10 HP (meaning they've taken 40 points of damage).

Damage can then be healed up until they reach 25 Hit Points (half their maximum). At that point, the healing cuts off. To get from 25 HP back up to full (50 HP) they're going to have to find some other source of healing.

In other words, the amount of damage that can be healed _is_ capped. The range is between 0 HP and half the maximum. At low levels with a 6 HP character, they can be healed 0-3 HP. For big buff characters with 200 HP, they'll get healed from 0 - 100 HP. If they've got 101 HP, too bad find some other way to heal.

The only thing you'll really want to think about is the _rate_ at which the 0-half HP is healed. The way the DS aura works, it's basically Fast Healing based on their Aura Bonus. Which tops out at +5. So the group could be there for a while getting healed. In the case of the DS it's an Aura, so it works on all allies within a range. If you're going for a single power type of thing like a cast spell/touch ability, then it's definitely going to take some time depending on the amount of damage done, the rate at which the ability heals it, and the number of people that need the healing.

As for the balance?

Well, in theory WotC found it balanced enough but that doesn't really count for much since it depends on whether you play the same way they do. In my group though it worked. The original idea behind my taking the Dragon Shaman with this aura was that it'd be a "work relief" for the Cleric. The DS would be able to heal everyone up so that they were only down to half the HP and then the cleric could take over and heal the most important people from half back up to full. It'd also mean the cleric could do something other than have a whole passel of Cure spells memorized.

When play started though, the person that was going to be the cleric decided "screw that" and went with a Warlock instead. So suddenly I became the default healer in the party.

The aura was a Fast Healing so it meant only a couple of HP per round, so it could stablize anyone that went down and help mitigate a bit of the damage, but it was mainly practical for after combat when everyone could gather around and get healed up to half.

The DM let Cure Light Wounds pots be available, so the group instead relied on me to get 'em to half, and then use potions to get from half to full. Of course, we weren't really in too much of a position to be able to buy up the potions in any great amount, so the end result was that most of the party went around half-battered a large portion of the time. I could keep 'em alive, just not looking really pretty.

 

[CleverNickName]

Damage can then be healed up until they reach 25 Hit Points (half their maximum). At that point, the healing cuts off. To get from 25 HP back up to full (50 HP) they're going to have to find some other source of healing.

In other words, the amount of damage that can be healed _is_ capped. The range is between 0 HP and half the maximum. At low levels with a 6 HP character, they can be healed 0-3 HP. For big buff characters with 200 HP, they'll get healed from 0 - 100 HP. If they've got 101 HP, too bad find some other way to heal.

The only thing you'll really want to think about is the _rate_ at which the 0-half HP is healed. The way the DS aura works, it's basically Fast Healing based on their Aura Bonus. Which tops out at +5. So the group could be there for a while getting healed. In the case of the DS it's an Aura, so it works on all allies within a range. If you're going for a single power type of thing like a cast spell/touch ability, then it's definitely going to take some time depending on the amount of damage done, the rate at which the ability heals it, and the number of people that need the healing.

Ah...gotcha. Yeah, I was a bit confused about your post. But I think I see what you've got going on here. And you are absolutely right, the problem with all of these healing systems is the rate at which healing gets done. The amount of healing isn't breaking the game for us.

I'll test your idea out this Friday. It sounds plausable, at least.

 

[deanruel]

So after doing some intensive playtesting I have a series of rules additions I felt I should bring to your attention. These are after playing through a number of very stereotypical dungeons with a range of differently levelled characters, and from discussion with players as to what the pro's and cons of the system were from their angle. I'll simply list the rule modifications they responded the best too and enjoyed using.

Spell Foci: Casting without a "Spell Focus" should give the caster a -4 to their caster check, but should still be possible. In addition a single feat should be available to allow casters to be able to cast without a focus. Sundering was too simple a blanket solution to mage attacks, and if the system was used for every spellcaster in a DM's game it would be good to have a simple option available for those characters who didn't want to use implements. Finally a small bonus should exist for specific foci. Such as +1 to opposed caster level checks with staff's, +1 hp healed when curing if using a holy symbol, or an only 10% increasing chance of spell failure for divination spells for Crystal Balls. This last part was just something that made the players excited and that always means "good idea" in my book.

Incantations: While we were still debating the exact breakdown of the rule all of the players expressed a strong preference for an "Incantation" rule I proposed and tried. I'll give it to you in the form we used although as I said we weren't quite done with it. Every full caster recieves an "Incantation 1/day" ability at first level. Wizards and Sorcerors recieve it at 1st, 5th, 10th, 15th, and 20th. Clerics and Druids recieve it at 1st, 10th, and 20th. When a caster uses an "Incantation" they can cast any spell on their classes spell list with a few restrictions. First they cast at a -4 to their caster level (minimum 1st) so it will be 2 levels below their maximum spell level. Additionally the spell takes a minute per spell level to cast unless the spell would normally take some number of minutes to cast, in which case it takes an hour per spell level. The reason for this ability is that we realized there was a huge portion of the spell lists that would never see use under this system, never ever ever. In a system where you get 2 spells of every level you will NEVER see someone cast water breathing. This way if you know you're going into an aquatic fight you can still cast Water Breathing. You've just got to know ahead of time.

First Level Spells: Giving 1st level characters 2 first level spells was met with great thanks. It seems small but having to do the same thing every single round was not fun for first level mages.

Counterspells: This is is just a writing suggestion. My players asked if Divine Casters could Dispel Arcane casters and I said yes because it doesn't say they can't. However just to make it a non-issue in readers minds I might reccomend adding that to the counterspell section.

Curing: I like the curing max idea. It's a good one. So did my players.

So there you have it. Everyone over here is a big fan of the spell system and we're all glad to do anything we can to help you out with it. Keep up the good work

 

[CleverNickName]

Wow...thanks for taking the time to playtest this stuff, and also for taking the time to type up such detailed notes and suggestions. This is really cool.

Spell Foci: Casting without a "Spell Focus" should give the caster a -4 to their caster check, but should still be possible. In addition a single feat should be available to allow casters to be able to cast without a focus. Sundering was too simple a blanket solution to mage attacks, and if the system was used for every spellcaster in a DM's game it would be good to have a simple option available for those characters who didn't want to use implements. Finally a small bonus should exist for specific foci. Such as +1 to opposed caster level checks with staff's, +1 hp healed when curing if using a holy symbol, or an only 10% increasing chance of spell failure for divination spells for Crystal Balls. This last part was just something that made the players excited and that always means "good idea" in my book.

Yeah, we are also starting to notice how squishy those spell foci could be in combat. This was the intended effect, to discourage spellcasters from getting tangled up in melee...but I don't think I meant for it to be so game-killing.

On the other hand, I think it would be too unbalancing to remove the requirement altogether and impose a penalty. Instead of allowing casting to be done without a focus but at a penalty, I propose we allow a caster to use a broken focus at a -4 penalty to the caster check...but if the caster has no focus (damaged, broken, or otherwise), she can't cast spells. I want to prevent spellcasters from becoming "monks for spells," meaning that even if they are captured and stripped of all of their gear and locked in a prison cell, they aren't particularly inconvenienced. (That's what psionics are for. )

I like your idea of "special" foci granting a bonus to the caster level check. This would probably be best handled with the magic item rules: a +1 holy symbol would allow a cleric to cast spells with a +1 bonus to her caster level, for example. The pricing for such an enhancement should be handled with caution...bonus squared x 2,000 might not be high enough. Awesome idea!

The "crystal ball for divinations" idea is wonderful, and it sounds like the player had a particular idiom that she wanted to use for her character. Instead of a hard rule that details specific bonuses and advantages, it might be easier to chalk this up to GM Judgement and let the +2/-2 rule apply. For example, the GM could decide that if a character owns a crystal ball, that might be an advantageous circumstance for certain Divination spells, and therefore he gives the caster a +2 bonus to her caster level check and/or waives the possibility for misinterpretation. Another awesome idea!

Incantations: While we were still debating the exact breakdown of the rule all of the players expressed a strong preference for an "Incantation" rule I proposed and tried. I'll give it to you in the form we used although as I said we weren't quite done with it. Every full caster recieves an "Incantation 1/day" ability at first level. Wizards and Sorcerors recieve it at 1st, 5th, 10th, 15th, and 20th. Clerics and Druids recieve it at 1st, 10th, and 20th. When a caster uses an "Incantation" they can cast any spell on their classes spell list with a few restrictions. First they cast at a -4 to their caster level (minimum 1st) so it will be 2 levels below their maximum spell level. Additionally the spell takes a minute per spell level to cast unless the spell would normally take some number of minutes to cast, in which case it takes an hour per spell level. The reason for this ability is that we realized there was a huge portion of the spell lists that would never see use under this system, never ever ever. In a system where you get 2 spells of every level you will NEVER see someone cast water breathing. This way if you know you're going into an aquatic fight you can still cast Water Breathing. You've just got to know ahead of time.

You are right, there are certain spells that will never get used under this system...but spellcasting abilities with per-day allowances are sort of what we are trying to get away from in this system. I propose that instead of making it a class feature, we make it a new use of the Spellcraft skill. Sort of like Use Magic Device, but for spells instead of magic items.

Let's say you really, REALLY need a stone to flesh spell, but nobody has learned it yet. The GM could allow the spellcasters to attempt a special ritual that would have the same effect of the needed spell, but with some serious restrictions to prevent abuse: the character will need to be of a caster level sufficient to cast the spell in the first place (caster level 12, since the spell is 6th level), the character would need her focus, and the character would need all material requirements for the spell (a pinch of earth and a drop of blood.) The ritual takes 10 minutes per level of the spell (a whole hour, in this case), and the Spellcraft DC could be 20 + spell level (the same DC for deciphering a scroll of the spell) or 20 + caster level (the UMD DC for casting a spell from a scroll).

Making it a skill check allows the GM to control it somewhat (with the +2 favorable/-2 unfavorable rule), and it lets us use the existing skill system instead of creating something new. Three casters could attempt the ritual together, and get the Aid Another bonus for example.

What do you think? I mean, there is always the craft magic item option...if a character needs a particular spell, she could just spend some time and XP crafting a scroll, potion, or wand of the spell. Thanks to the softened requirements for spellcasting, a character doesn't need to know a particular spell in order to make a magic item out of it (but all requirements for the spell have to be met.)

First Level Spells: Giving 1st level characters 2 first level spells was met with great thanks. It seems small but having to do the same thing every single round was not fun for first level mages.

I don't have a problem with this. I think it used to be 2 1st level spells at 1st level, but I changed it for some reason (and forgot to change it on bards, paladins, and rangers), or something. My players would heartily agree with you, so in the words of the great Capt. Jean-Luc Picard, "make it so."

Counterspells: This is is just a writing suggestion. My players asked if Divine Casters could Dispel Arcane casters and I said yes because it doesn't say they can't. However just to make it a non-issue in readers minds I might reccomend adding that to the counterspell section.

I hadn't decided if I wanted to allow this or not, because I haven't had a chance to test it. I don't see it becoming a balance problem, so I say let's allow it.

Curing: I like the curing max idea. It's a good one. So did my players.

Yeah, it goes a long way to helping out the severe restriction on healing magic. I think that this rule, along with the softened requirements for crafting magic items, pretty much fixes the Healing Bug for me. Other GMs might need to tweak it for their personal gaming style, but it plays good for us.

So there you have it. Everyone over here is a big fan of the spell system and we're all glad to do anything we can to help you out with it. Keep up the good work

Thanks again for your help. This is shaping up to be a good product. I have another playtest tonight with my online group; we are going to try our best to break the Healing system at 1st, 8th, and 16th level. And we are going to see how badly this whole system falls apart when we go Epic Level with it (I'm guessing that it will be ABSOLUTELY INSANE.)

BTW, if you would like me to credit your players for helping with the playtest, just drop me their names (or nicknames, or character names.)

 

[deanruel]

Wow...thanks for taking the time to playtest this stuff, and also for taking the time to type up such detailed notes and suggestions. This is really cool.

Indeed it is really cool. Your system is so cool in fact that it's definitely worth helping out

On the other hand, I think it would be too unbalancing to remove the requirement altogether and impose a penalty. Instead of allowing casting to be done without a focus but at a penalty, I propose we allow a caster to use a broken focus at a -4 penalty to the caster check...but if the caster has no focus (damaged, broken, or otherwise), she can't cast spells. I want to prevent spellcasters from becoming "monks for spells," meaning that even if they are captured and stripped of all of their gear and locked in a prison cell, they aren't particularly inconvenienced. (That's what psionics are for. )

I think that's a good and reasonable idea. The ability to still cast while using a broken focus is in line with the existing fluff and good for game balance. I still think, however, that an option should exist in the system for a spellcaster to cast even without a focus in hand. This would allow characters who don't want foci to still use the system and would make particular sense for things like Dragons who cast spells but would look very strange indeed with a wand clutched under their claw. So what do you think about making a feat that allows a caster to still cast spells without a focus as long as it is on his body? This way dragons could have amulets on their necks and some Clerics could just have their Holy Symbols hanging from their wrists and they could still cast. This would work well in particular with the "Foci bonuses" idea because if you said the foci had to be in hand for the bonus to exist you would still make it beneficial for a Dragon to clutch thier amulet from time to time or something.

I like your idea of "special" foci granting a bonus to the caster level check. This would probably be best handled with the magic item rules: a +1 holy symbol would allow a cleric to cast spells with a +1 bonus to her caster level, for example. The pricing for such an enhancement should be handled with caution...bonus squared x 2,000 might not be high enough. Awesome idea!
The "crystal ball for divinations" idea is wonderful, and it sounds like the player had a particular idiom that she wanted to use for her character. Instead of a hard rule that details specific bonuses and advantages, it might be easier to chalk this up to GM Judgement and let the +2/-2 rule apply. For example, the GM could decide that if a character owns a crystal ball, that might be an advantageous circumstance for certain Divination spells, and therefore he gives the caster a +2 bonus to her caster level check and/or waives the possibility for misinterpretation. Another awesome idea!

I don't think that the 4E magic item system would do you well. It's main problem is that almost no matter how expensive you make it an item that gives you +3 to your caster level in your system has just broken it. But perhaps the idea behind the system is solid. Thusly I'll propose two possible ideas both of which will use the options I've provided below (just as a prototype set of options). Option 1) Every spellcaster chooses at level 1 a single benefit from the list below which he recieves when his Focus is in hand. Option 2) A caster may enchant their focus just like a weapon for the same amount. For every +1 the caster gets the focus grants him one benefit from the table below, up to a maximum of 5 benefits at +5.

+2 to Turn Undead attempts
+1 to caster level when casting spells of a school of your choice
+1 to caster level when casting spells from a domain of your choice
+2 on opposed Counterspell rolls
+1 bonus to one of your saving throws
An ongoing 10% chance of each divination spell failing, replacing the usual ongoing 20% chance.
Reduces your acane spell failure by 5%
When casting an area of effect spell you may leave a single 5 foot square unaffected
+1 Caster level when casting a spell modified by a metamagic feat
When casting a damage dealing spell you may add an additional d4 damage of whatever kind the spell would normally deal
+2 to Spellcraft checks
+2 to Concentration checks
+2 to Use Magic Device checks
+2 to Spell Penetration rolls
+2 to caster level when casting spells that only affects non-magical animals

You are right, there are certain spells that will never get used under this system...but spellcasting abilities with per-day allowances are sort of what we are trying to get away from in this system. I propose that instead of making it a class feature, we make it a new use of the Spellcraft skill. Sort of like Use Magic Device, but for spells instead of magic items.

I think that's a system with good intentions but bad mechanics honestly. It's biggest problem is that it's not finite. If I have a bunch of time I can just keep casting any number of spells, of almost any kind or variety I want. And at high levels it gets particularly mean because the DC doesn't increase fast enough, meaning basically that a DC 21 check for a 1st level spell is practically impossible for a 1st level character. But a DC 29 spell for 9th level spell will never be failed by a level 18+ mage. As a note I do agree that the Spell crafting system might be able to serve the function by itself, I just don't feel it is the most.....what do I want to say.....artistic way it could be done. Yeah artistic. I think we can find a way that feels good and gets players excited to use it. It'll just take a bit.

I hadn't decided if I wanted to allow this or not, because I haven't had a chance to test it. I don't see it becoming a balance problem, so I say let's allow it.

If you wanted to play it safe you could say you get a -2 to your caster level on counterspells against spellcasters with a different power source (arcane, divine, psionic). That might work nicely.

BTW, if you would like me to credit your players for helping with the playtest, just drop me their names (or nicknames, or character names.)

Huh it never even occured to me. I wouldn't have thought of it but since you mention it I would like that very much. Just because I know for a fact that they'd be really excited to see their names on their rules packet . The two women testing your rules in my group are Ilise Simard (who's plays the Cleric "Destiny") and Rose Ruel (who plays the Wizard "Cordove" ). Thank you.