Taking care of magic users...

[Evenglare]

I know pathfinder fixed many of the problems with the rift of fighter and wizard. So this probably doesnt apply as much to pathfinder as it would to 3.5 but anyway here is my idea.
To get right down to it, magic users need to be able to shut down other magic users in fights relatively easily. So I'm thinking make counter-spelling much more commonplace. There are a few possible options I'm toying around with.

The first option is that a caster may choose to sacrifice a spell slot and do the whole DC= 15 + spell level to see if it worked. This would easily reduce the effectiveness of wizards at high levels assuming they are fighting a wizard or other magical being.

The second option is to let dispel be the only source of counter spelling however to do so remove the dispel check. Then counter as normal. Dispel is a 3rd level spell so I figured once that comes up the magic users are getting some of the more advanced spells as well as a way to dispel them. Dispel of course , would need to be prepared multiple times.

Along with these options a couple of feats could be made to reduce the spell check for countering.

A third option would be to implement some sort of fatigue or damage from casting a spell. This has been done before in the dragonlance setting. Whenever a spell would be cast, you would make a Fort save vs a DC = 10+ spell level , if failed you become fatigued, then exhaused, then unconscious. Other DCs to mess around with might be a DC = 15+spell level or a DC of 10 + Twice spell level.

Now for melee classes such as a fighter there is a way to hand this I believe. One way would be to introduce a feat that would give the fighter a way to hone magical items to dispel a spell . The item would lose all it's properties for a day or something like that.

TLDR - make counterspells more commonplace and easier to use.
Thoughts?

 

[Mad Hamish]

I don't agree with your stated goal.
If it's too easy or effective to counter spell then it becomes far too easy for PCs to be shut down which leaves the casters not having a positive effect on the game.

Alternatively it's too easy for them to shut down the opposition casters which does away with much of the tension of a lot of encounters

 

[tylermalan]

I also disagree with the stated goal. I don't think the purpose of a magic user is to shut down other magic users. Magic is too versatile and the game itself is too fluid for such a specific role.

 

[billd91]

I'm sympathetic to your stated goal. I think it should be a worthwhile choice for a caster - go on the offensive or play on the defensive - and be able to change that tactic from round to round.

 

[Evenglare]

I don't agree with your stated goal.
If it's too easy or effective to counter spell then it becomes far too easy for PCs to be shut down which leaves the casters not having a positive effect on the game.

Alternatively it's too easy for them to shut down the opposition casters which does away with much of the tension of a lot of encounters

But isnt the big argument that at higher levels magic users wipe the battlefield therefore making battles have NO tension whatsoever?

 

[Crothian]

We are in our first Pathfinder campaign and are 14th level. The Wizard (and Druid) does have some great area effect spells but those just take away some of the hit points of the foes, and then makes it easier for the Paladin and Fighter in our group to take down the enemies. Battles still have tension especially the ones in Pathfinder adventures since theirs always seem to be on the difficult side.

 

[Mad Hamish]

But isnt the big argument that at higher levels magic users wipe the battlefield therefore making battles have NO tension whatsoever?

facing opposition spellcasters is a huge source of tension, negate them easily and you lose that tension.

spellcasters can have an absolutely huge impact on battles but if you make it too easy to negate them then
a) you've got to rebalance encounters hugely
b) you've got a player who's sitting around and not able to contribute
c) you confront the party with the lich-king and he doesn't get a spell off for the encounter because the party counterspells everything

stuffing around with the balance isn't easy to get right - let's not forget that there's been almost 40 years of evolution to Pathfinder - and I think this is going too far.

 

[Burn_Boy]

But isnt the big argument that at higher levels magic users wipe the battlefield therefore making battles have NO tension whatsoever?

I had this problem in my campaign with the groups sorcerer. She had so many AOE attacks that the usual method of Big Bad with swarm of lower level baddies, was being wiped up in about two rounds. I found that if you want to keep the parties magics users occupied, or at least give them enemies that'll let everyone else shine, rather than standing behind the bazooka, send golems after them.

Like I said above, my partys sorcerer was wiping up everything quite nicely, and then I threw a few flesh golems at them, and suddenly the fighters and rogue had to do the heavy lifting and our sorcerer was wishing she had taken a few more of the Transmutation buffs =)

 

[Pielorinho]

I had this problem in my campaign with the groups sorcerer. She had so many AOE attacks that the usual method of Big Bad with swarm of lower level baddies, was being wiped up in about two rounds. I found that if you want to keep the parties magics users occupied, or at least give them enemies that'll let everyone else shine, rather than standing behind the bazooka, send golems after them.

Like I said above, my partys sorcerer was wiping up everything quite nicely, and then I threw a few flesh golems at them, and suddenly the fighters and rogue had to do the heavy lifting and our sorcerer was wishing she had taken a few more of the Transmutation buffs =)

My general rule is, if folks can do stuff, they're happy. With that in mind, some alternative solutions:
1) Give the baddies more HP, or better saves. That way, the sorcerer can still hurt them, but it'll be up to the fighter-types to finish them off.
2) Have them come from multiple directions simultaneously (possibly increasing their numbers). The sorcerer can take out the ones to the north and east, but not the ones to the west and south.
3) Increase the number of tanks among the baddies. Many low-HP ones get wiped out by the sorcerer's magic, but there are a few with lots of HP, or protection from elements, or improved evasion, or whatever, who need attention from someone with something pointy.

I play an illusionist, and my efficacy-expectation is that in a battle, I'll be able to cause multiple enemies to lose actions. But I definitely don't want to be able to render the fighters obsolete; that would be no fun. A blaster sorcerer ought to expect to clear the pawns off the board, but the major players should be left relatively unscathed.

 

[gamerprinter]

But isnt the big argument that at higher levels magic users wipe the battlefield therefore making battles have NO tension whatsoever?

Some people think, many more don't. I don't play epic, not because of the magic users, but because I don't care for super high level play. But 15th to 20th, though less manageable is about as high a level as I ever want to be.

Really, I haven't found 12th level and above magic to be counter to a good game of PF, and I prefer to play martial characters most of the time.

The "Big Argument" is only applicable to some gamers, not all.