Thoughts on spell DC based on level rather than INT bonus

[dvvega]

Thullgrim, by doing that you're saying that the genius 1st level wizard (INT 20) is just as good at casting a spell as the dimwitted 1st level wizard (INT 15). Both are 1st level however the genius has learnt his techniques better.

Think Hermione Granger vs Ron Weasley for comparison. She's not a higher level wizard, she's just more adept (Spellcasting Prodigy) and more intelligent.

 

[thullgrim]

agreed. I prefer the first solution: 1/2 level + Int+ 10, but If I were removing Int from the equation entirely, thats how I would go about it.

 

[Chacal]

IMC , we use 10+spell level + 1/2 Int +1/3 Spellcaster level
We only tested it from level 1 to 10 and it seems to work for us.
Some precisons on the context : int-bumping items are extremely rare
IMC, and none have found one.
I like the idea of tying it to spellcraft, but It might
be hard for sorcerers, for whom the skill is not mandatory, and who have less skillpoints.

Chacal

 

[Plane Sailing]

I don't think a direct comparison between INT for wizards and STR for fighters etc is appropriate, since the magic using classes have one-shot-one-kill options (save or die spells) which the non magic using classes don't. This makes (under the current rules) magic user stat inflation more of a killer tactic.

A higher INT is always good for wizards because of the bonus spells, it is not as if it becomes useless. You can *always* use higher level spells slots!

I still want to keep INT out of the equation entirely, I prefer the kind of game where experience counts more than natural (or enhanced) ability - just personal taste, but it seems more like the kind of fiction that I enjoy than the alternative.

I'm interested by the sound of what Monte Cook is going to be doing in his Arcana Unearthed handbook though - I really like the sound of dividing spells into Simple, Complex and Exotic for each spell level. A few details here

http://www.montecook.com/diary.html

cheers

 

[MarauderX]

I think I agree with you for the most part, Plane, about having experience far outweigh natural ability. The only problem with that has already been stated, in that the same level character will have the same DC, making all wizards 'the same'. If you did take out the INT modifier, wizards would still decide to increase their INT anyway, if not for bonuses in skills, then for the extra spells at least. However, I cannot see why extra ability should not be used when it definitely applies, and to do so would be akin to removing DEX from a Reflex save.

I would be agreeable to some combination of the above, such as

10+ INT mod + Spell Level/2 + Caster Level/2

Round each of the 1/2 items up before adding up the total. With the above the range ends up being from 13 to about 31, depending on all of the INT modifiers. A good arguement can be made to include all of the items, and it would be rather hard to ignore any of them, in my opinion.

Having spellcraft involved is also a valid point, but to me it doesn't deal with spellcasting directly, but only with identification, effects, etc.

 

[Plane Sailing]

There would still be differentiation by level and by feat choice though, wouldn't there? Some wizards would chose combinations of spell focus feats, others would look more at the metamagic feats.

The INT business was brand new with 3e (never affected saves before), and to my mind it creates too big a variation.

If you think back to the old days, spell save "DC"s never got any tougher from higher level wizards at all!

Thanks everyone for the discussion and input.

Cheers

 

[Chacal]

10+ INT mod + Spell Level/2 + Caster Level/2

Round each of the 1/2 items up before adding up the total.

Just two remarks for the above :
Rounding up creates a precedent, since the standard is rounding down IIRC.
Since spell levels < caster level (except for scrolls ? )
your formula is augmenting DCs , thus giving more power to wizards.

I also agree with Plane Sailing on the fact that INT is creating too much variation. Plus it motivates much of the "running after INT-boosting magic" attitude
that doesn't fit my games (I'm not saying that it isn't ok for other games, just saying how a formula can impact attitudes)

Chacal