Throwing down the Tyranny of the Spellcaster.

[Minigiant]

The problem is not the spell caster.
It is the spells.

They take no time to cast.
Powerful spells should take full rounds or multiple rounds to cast.

Multiple effects are piled together.
Fly should make you fly fast, it just lets you fly. Want to fly fast? Cast Fly then Haste. Want to dominate someone, better charm them first.

And low level spells scale too well.
Spells should have set effects. Scaling should come through research.

 

[fuindordm]

I think Rule no. 1 should be to keep the spells in a list on theme.

I don't think spellcasters need to be narrowly specialized, necessarily, but designers shouldn't have carte blanche to add any spell they like to a class' spell list with only weak justification.

For example, the design rules for cleric spells might be:
Divination, Healing, Protection: no restriction. These spells are the bread and butter of the class.
Conjuration: Only related to summoning/bargaining with outsiders, or elementals if closely tied to domain/theme.
Transformation: Only if closely tied to domain/theme (Statue for earth gods, wild shape for druid)
Evocation: Very rare, no new spells outside core (A couple of radiance spells, flame strike...)
Domain spells: can bring in spells from other lists, but at +1 level or +2 levels if they don't obey the above rules.
Such guidelines should be accompanies by a paragraph describing the role of the class in the world and what the major themes of the magical style are.

Rule No. 2 in my book would be that every spellcasting class has a limitation. For example:

Wizard: all spells must be prepared, V/S/M component system.
Cleric: all but domain spells must be prepared, most require DF, V/S/M.

But I would love to see the player have more choice as to the limitations of their magic. To borrow a page from HERO, why not allow a wizard who instead of using the V/S/M system, had a small chance that any given spell would backfire? Or an alchemist/wizard who needs to mix ingredients during spell preparation (M replaces V as most common component, preparation takes twice as long), but almost never needed to speak any words?

It wouldnt take much space to add a module for "Magical Traditions" offering players a choice between Mentalist wizards (concentration required for all spells, no components), Wild Mages (side effect instead of V/S/M), Blood Mages (spells do minor HP damage to caster, no V or M components), and more.

 

[BobTheNob]

Im kind of for chaos and consequence.

To me, spell casters are wild cards. They defy the laws of nature and physics and throw curve balls into the game. They are unreliable, potent and chaotic (at least, thats what I would like arcane to be ).

I prefer that spells really are potent, but that casting them is a constant risk. You are re-writing the rules or reality, and that cant be good. I like spells to have
a) A Change of failure
b) A chance of CATASTROPHIC failure.

I would like spells to go wrong. To backfire (sorry guys, just set off that fireball with me at the center, think I got everyone...my bad!), or give humorous and nasty result when things go wrong (accidently turning a fellow players head into a chickens head?). Maybe even permanent mutations like one half of your face turning to scales.

I want players to understand that when they say "I cast a spell" its not a predictable result. It could be utterly spectacular and completely change the terms of the encounter in your favor, or (an outside chance) it could be an absolute disaster.

To me, THATS the cost of magic. CHAOS

 

[Dragonblade]

Instead of nerfing casters, I'd rather see melee classes boosted to match. Tome of Battle style!

Then I can have my cake and eat it too.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I chose the beholder option because it was too fun to resist. My real answer is casting time and raising the risks of powerful spells.

 

[drothgery]

I believe only the first two -- Limiting Options and Limiting Power -- are really practical for a tabletop RPG where you want players of wizards and players of fighters to have fun.

If magic is considerably less reliable than swinging a sword, it's not really an enjoyable experience; IME, players hate it when their characters' spells are constantly saved against / defeated by spell resistance / interrupted by an attack.

And increasing casting time (or making spells cost other resources beyond spell slots / daily or encounter power slots / spell points / etc.) just can't be done with spells that characters are expected to routinely use in combat (if you want to put big utility / buff magic into a 'rituals' subsystem that isn't normally used in combat, you can have longer casting times there).

 

[Andor]

Frankly I'm more concerned with flavor than with balance, which I think is a pointless bugaboo of class based systems. I mean D&D, unbalanced as it is, isn't nearly as bad as some of the systems out there. Look at Rifts which has power levels ranging from the Vagabond whose most fearsome weapon is his lack of general hygine, to the Cosmo Knight, a class designed to go toe-to-prow with Star Destroyers.

*ahem* That aside, I think that restrictions which enhance the flavor of the class are the most desireable ones. Increase casting times for powerful spells. Include ritual components which can be anything from cash costs for incense to a need for assistants to chant in 4-part harmony. Themantic costs or penalties should exist like aging for casting Time Stop, but should screw all races equally. Demon summoning (or angels, for that matter) should be a risky buisiness that calls for some diplomacy checks and hard bargining.

Arthur wasn't jealous of Merlin, of course Merlin had to sleep off the price of his spells and it cost him months or years of being out of action. While that's great in a book, it's a little hard to manage in a party.

Wizards should be playable. They should be powerful, they should be magical. They should not, however be an 'I win' button. They should have difficulties or problems that mundanes simply never face as well as abilities. A vow never to sit facing east to pay for his command of the winds, a geas to always pause and knock three times before entering a door as a legacy of his trip to faerie to gain the power of illusion. For example in Runequest/Heroquest a Shaman, once he has awakened his fetch is always present in the spirit world and risks attack by hostile spirits at any time from forces his companions can't even perceive.

 

[Aenghus]

The OPs first two points are what I have trust in working to create a system I would like.

I want spellcasters who can constantly and reliably cast magic, not ration it out like misers, or juggle with unreliable casting methods (whether from failure chances, skill checks, disruption chances, whatever).

The price for constant access to magic is weaker magic, magic that is never a simple "I win" button. That's a price I for one accept gladly.

I also want more restricted access to magic for casters. Generalists if they exist should have weaker magic than specialists. Specialists should have limted access to magic outside their speciality.

The most evocative feature of the 4e wizard class was constant access to cantrips like prestidigitation. These are framed to be useless for combat, but are very evocative for roleplaying purposes, and for me make the wizard feel like a wizard. I thought at-will attack magic was a great advance for spellcasters in 4e as well, but I will insert at-will cantrips into the next edition for wizards, regardless of the design WotC end up producing.

Rituals are the best way devised so far within 4e of describing plot device type spells, the sort of spells that can ruin adventures unless access to them is restricted somehow. I hope that the ritual concept is retained and improved.

I have a number of issues I have with the other potential limitations on spellcasters listed with the OP. Fundamentally, I don'tl like catastrophic balance measures which result in all or nothing scenarios. These are difficult for referees to deal with at the best of times, and are a nightmare for new referees. They invite all sorts of fudging on both ends of the table, either in a desparate attempt to rein in out of control spellcasters, or evade potentially fatal drawbacks to spellcasting.

When these balance measures existed in earlier editions of D&D every referee and group houseruled them differently. In some groups playing a wizard was futile, their spells never worked properly and the monsters attacked them preferentially. In others, spellcasters ruled everything and their drawbacks were never applied. The variance in their treatment was much higher than for fighters, makiing it one of the issues to learn in new groups before choosing to play a spellcaster in them.

Oh, and personally I hate random casting features like wild magic. Hate, hate, hate, something reinforced in me by the gawdaful Avatar trilogy adventure converting 1e Forgotten Realms to 2e. It really sucked playing a wizard in those adventures, risking a TPK with every spellcasting, and getting the wonderful opportunity to be shown up at every turn by the NPC avatar of the goddess of magic. Phew.

 

[Arctic Wolf]

I voted for the beholder option because you always need more eyes . Anyways I would have to go for limiting casting time. I hope no one kills me for using 4e as an example but they should of done it like this: At-wills would be the same since they are very basic spells, encounters should take one turn to cast, and dailies should be three turns. You could also have the option to take one turn less, but it would do 1 die less (or more) depending on how powerful it is, or you can attempt to cast it for one or so more rounds to make it more powerful, and you would still have to roll to hit of course but still you get my point

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Have some of all the restrictions, and most casters can benefit from several, if not all.

There is some weak, fairly reliable magic, that a caster can use more or less whenever they feel like it. It might miss (or be saved against), but it works about as well as sword or bow.

Then there is more powerful magic that has more limits--time, (real expense), danger, etc. Ideally, you'd have the option to do some trade-offs here. I'd say that a casting time of one round per level is too strong a scale--maybe one round per 3 levels will work. But if you also had some expense and danger options to blend with that one round per level, it could work. Cast faster, at cost and risk, or cast slower at less cost or risk. Those kinds of systems, if built moderately well, let each caster pick their preferred mix.

Then you might have a few classes that don't get such options, but in return get something else. Their casting is all one way or the other, but they are compensated.

Such a system provides plenty of obvious balance options for non casters. After all, a non caster can find some magical equipment that runs those same time, expense, and cost gauntlets. Meanwhile, the sword and bow still work.

BTW, another "time" option that is less intrusive in some ways than the 1 round per level is to make all spells require a move action to "ready" and then a standard action to cast. It takes a full round to cast a spell, some planning, but you don't get the immediate interrupts issues if the caster has to move. Basically, they can "ready" at some point, hold it for awhile, and then "cast" once in position. Presumably, concentration is possible to break in the meantime, but not nearly as likely as interrupting the actual casting.

For an even nastier variant, use move action to "cast" and then standard action to "target". Now, the spell is fully formed in the meantime, and interruptions can get dicy. That fireball spell is in your hand until you throw it! On the plus side, personal protection spells (or any spell that doesn't require targeting) is as easy to cast as always. This appropriately makes defense easier than offense, while giving weapon users an edge. A wizard chased by a warrior can throw up defenses, but can't get much going offensively without some distance, help, or risk--or perhaps using an item.

With this system, you can make particularly powerful spells take an extra "move" or three to cast, but still release in one standard action. It only takes a round or two to get the full thing off, but the caster can't do anything else during that time.