WotC sayz "People don't use rituals much" - O RLY?

[Hadrian the Builder]

[MENTION=82106]AbdulAlhazred[/MENTION]

Nicely put. Especially the dichotomy of the working ritual system that is also not working.

 

[Jack99]

I don't see that rituals get used much in my group either, even with encouragement and components thrown at them. Even the travel rituals get forgotten unless I remind them. When we played 3.5, the players used magic all the time to shorten the road or overcome obstacles.

I’m still not clear on what the designers intended to accomplish with their changes to the spell system.. Clearly, they’ve made a distinction between combat spells and non-combat spell, but what’s the point?

Look at the difference between knock in 4e vs. knock in 3.5: in 4e, Knock costs 35gp and 1 healing surge to cast, plus 10 minutes, and you cant; use it in combat. Your fighter could BEAT the door down faster. In 3.5, it cost nothing to cast (except maybe a spell slot, or 25 gp for a scroll) and a standard action.

Knock is obviously not a combat spell (unless you’re a door, I suppose), but why shouldn’t it be cast in combat? The problem with rituals isn’t JUST their cost, it’s that their utility is hampered. Rituals feel like a sidebar to the game.

Here’s my idea of a grand revamping: Return to Vancian magic…sort of. Combat powers seem to work fine, or at least, I don’t see my wizard players complaining a lot. Give ritual casters more for their feat. For example, if you take the feat, you can cast rituals AND you get a spell progression (err ritual progression). Everyday you prepare rituals, just as you used to prepare spells in a previous edition. And you get to cast them for free. Eg. At 3rd level you get 1 2nd level spell, 2 1st level spells and 4 cantrips. Reduce the casting times to combat scale (1 standard action typically). And then LET THE PLAYERS CHOOSE what the most effective action will be. If you want to take it a step further, problem rituals could have both a combat definition and a non-combat definition (see Snare for an example), if there are concerns about balance. And classes that get the ritual feat could be initially limited to their theme-appropriate rituals, so that druids and rangers get access to nature rituals, wizards to arcane and divine casters to religion.

This is a nutty idea, throwing off all balance that 4e is built on out of the window. It might be worth considering.

 

[Hadrian the Builder]

Thanks, nutty ideas are my specialty.

 

[Balesir]

Frankly I don't have a solution to offer either. The best I've suggested is looking very hard at the parcel system, because costs are root of the issue and that is all about available funds vs outlayed funds. From the general lack of comments on that I've seen I'll have to assume that my opinion there is either largely not shared or the whole issue is too unclear for much to be said about it.

I understand your point with the 'parcels' issue, but I don't see a clear solution that way, because:

- Gold in 4E, at least as originally conceived, is a resource in the game. In order for it to be a meaningful resource, the amount available has to be limited.

- If the game is not to succumb to significant 'power drift' as the PCs advance levels, resources that have any persistence at all must be tied to level.

- As a result of these things, giving extra treasure - whether it be as a reward for 'successful play' or as a bonus for using consumable items and rituals - either unbalances long-term play or effectively means consumables are cost-free.

It seems to me that the root of the problem is not the resource itself, but the fact that persistent advantages (magic items, boons, etc.) and consumable advantages (consumable items, rituals, martial practices, alchemy) share the same resource pool. The obvious remedy seems to me to be to either:

(a) add another resource and split the resources between the two things, or

(b) add an extra resource that is required in addition to gold for the permanent advantages, while leaving gold as a requirement for both.

I think (a) suffers from lack of any clear, fitting alternate resource from the game "canon", but maybe (b) could work if some specific, non-purchasable action or "trigger" could be found to be required as an "enabler" for the creation of a specific item? That might fix item "creation" - "purchase" of permanent advanatages would need some other solution. A skill challenge (and time) requirement to find them, perhaps? Or something linked to milestones and quests that is a longer-term resource, rather than short-term (like healing surges)? Maybe just make the "trigger" a purely meta resource that determines both the ability to create and the availability to buy items?

Whatever - I think an extra resource or two is inescapably required to fix both this and the related "item daily power" issue. The "solution" of "chucking it all into the DM's lap" that is "Item Rarity" I find just lazy, deleterious to the game and unsuccessful at fixing what needs fixing. Both items and consumables/rituals should remain player-controlled features, limited by resources supplied by the DM through play according to DMG guidelines, IMV.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I understand your point with the 'parcels' issue, but I don't see a clear solution that way, because:

- Gold in 4E, at least as originally conceived, is a resource in the game. In order for it to be a meaningful resource, the amount available has to be limited.

- If the game is not to succumb to significant 'power drift' as the PCs advance levels, resources that have any persistence at all must be tied to level.

- As a result of these things, giving extra treasure - whether it be as a reward for 'successful play' or as a bonus for using consumable items and rituals - either unbalances long-term play or effectively means consumables are cost-free.

It seems to me that the root of the problem is not the resource itself, but the fact that persistent advantages (magic items, boons, etc.) and consumable advantages (consumable items, rituals, martial practices, alchemy) share the same resource pool. The obvious remedy seems to me to be to either:

(a) add another resource and split the resources between the two things, or

(b) add an extra resource that is required in addition to gold for the permanent advantages, while leaving gold as a requirement for both.

I think (a) suffers from lack of any clear, fitting alternate resource from the game "canon", but maybe (b) could work if some specific, non-purchasable action or "trigger" could be found to be required as an "enabler" for the creation of a specific item? That might fix item "creation" - "purchase" of permanent advanatages would need some other solution. A skill challenge (and time) requirement to find them, perhaps? Or something linked to milestones and quests that is a longer-term resource, rather than short-term (like healing surges)? Maybe just make the "trigger" a purely meta resource that determines both the ability to create and the availability to buy items?

Whatever - I think an extra resource or two is inescapably required to fix both this and the related "item daily power" issue. The "solution" of "chucking it all into the DM's lap" that is "Item Rarity" I find just lazy, deleterious to the game and unsuccessful at fixing what needs fixing. Both items and consumables/rituals should remain player-controlled features, limited by resources supplied by the DM through play according to DMG guidelines, IMV.

You mean like the rarity system? You understand that is EXACTLY what it does. By removing practically all items from the realm of purchase and into a strictly DM controlled category it effectively decouples gold from permanent character power. Now, the DM may, and often will, allow some degree of equivalence, but this is not something that is established in the rules framework. Admittedly there is still an item sale price and the NOTION that items have a GP value hasn't really been dispelled. Still, the actuality of it has to a large degree.

Suffice it to say I find rarity FAR superior to some ham-fisted process of inventing more and more fanciful and artificial types of 'resources' for the solution of every issue in the game. Resources are a fine concept, but when you start growing them like weeds that's a sign that there needs to be a deeper look at what is what.

IMHO gold is a perfectly good resource to use to control consumable game element access. That is now accomplished, if not actually explained. The one remaining issue then is between consumables (and I use this word broadly, rituals are fundamentally consumables) and 'plot money'. I think this isn't an issue for consumables that are themselves plot devices. The ritual that you need to cast in order to teleport to the adventure location is a plot device. Additionally the trade-off in the player's minds between "I can build a castle or cast this ritual" isn't so much of a problem when you need to cast the ritual to survive or progress and there is going to be a sufficiently larger reward from doing so than taking some other option.

Ultimately the real issue is playability. Consumables could best be regulated perhaps by 'character influence' in an RP sense, such that having the ally who's an alchemist gives you access to what you need, etc. The problem here is simply that most play is at a more casual and less highly developed story/plot level. It leaves the casual gamer and DM out in the cold.

I'd almost suggest that XP is the currency to use for consumables. This would work if the cost was distributed equally among PCs. That seems either unlikely to happen or it will seem rather artificial.

 

[Balesir]

You mean like the rarity system? You understand that is EXACTLY what it does. By removing practically all items from the realm of purchase and into a strictly DM controlled category it effectively decouples gold from permanent character power.

What I suggested is not even remotely what "Rarity" does. There is no second resource - just DM whim. That's not a rule system - it's a cop-out.

Now, the DM may, and often will, allow some degree of equivalence, but this is not something that is established in the rules framework. Admittedly there is still an item sale price and the NOTION that items have a GP value hasn't really been dispelled. Still, the actuality of it has to a large degree.

And this is also a problem - the items can be sold - but only to allow huge amounts of ritual use (not really consumables in general - most of them are "uncommon"). In other words, the treasure system is still geared to a gold-equivalency of magic items, but without the ability to spend gold on magic items. It's a borked-up mess.

Suffice it to say I find rarity FAR superior to some ham-fisted process of inventing more and more fanciful and artificial types of 'resources' for the solution of every issue in the game. Resources are a fine concept, but when you start growing them like weeds that's a sign that there needs to be a deeper look at what is what.

And a "deeper look" amounts to just bunging it into "DM fiat"??? Come on, surely we can do better than that. All character elements are resource limited selections - permanent items should be no different. Different resources are necessary for radically different "classes" of character element - just as getting healing surges from the same "resource pot" as feats come from would not work, neither will rituals and items from the same exact pot.

IMHO gold is a perfectly good resource to use to control consumable game element access. That is now accomplished, if not actually explained. The one remaining issue then is between consumables (and I use this word broadly, rituals are fundamentally consumables) and 'plot money'. I think this isn't an issue for consumables that are themselves plot devices. The ritual that you need to cast in order to teleport to the adventure location is a plot device. Additionally the trade-off in the player's minds between "I can build a castle or cast this ritual" isn't so much of a problem when you need to cast the ritual to survive or progress and there is going to be a sufficiently larger reward from doing so than taking some other option.

Plot devices should be a separate category, I agree. Hence Artifacts as a distinct class from items; an analogous class is needed (and arguably exists, in examples if not in explicit rules) for rituals and consumable items.

What is needed now is a resource for magic items. Having gold be part of the mix would be fine - it could cover finer gradations of power pretty well as a trade-off against consumable availability - but some limitation that leaves gold for rituals and consumables would help. Kicking magic items into DM candy land as "Artifacts, but less interesting" is just a horrible waste of a lesson that I thought had been learned from examining previous editions.

Items are character elements - they should be player, not DM, choices (limited, as with all other character elements, by resources). This is what they should always have been, in my strong opinion. It reduces hassle for the DM, increases fun for the players and adds a fun "party building" element not added by any other feature in the game. Items represent abilities used by the characters according to the tactics of the players to overcome in-game challenges - as such they are character elements, not setting or scenario elements. Punting them to the DM I find (a) the wrong place for them to be and (b) lazy, poor design.

I'd almost suggest that XP is the currency to use for consumables. This would work if the cost was distributed equally among PCs. That seems either unlikely to happen or it will seem rather artificial.

I don't see XP as a good resource for any character element, really. Either the use of the element can lead to more XP earned - which is essentially the same as saying they're free - or those using these elements will progress more slowly, which will make them easily as unpopular as they are now.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

What I suggested is not even remotely what "Rarity" does. There is no second resource - just DM whim. That's not a rule system - it's a cop-out.

And this is also a problem - the items can be sold - but only to allow huge amounts of ritual use (not really consumables in general - most of them are "uncommon"). In other words, the treasure system is still geared to a gold-equivalency of magic items, but without the ability to spend gold on magic items. It's a borked-up mess.

And a "deeper look" amounts to just bunging it into "DM fiat"??? Come on, surely we can do better than that. All character elements are resource limited selections - permanent items should be no different. Different resources are necessary for radically different "classes" of character element - just as getting healing surges from the same "resource pot" as feats come from would not work, neither will rituals and items from the same exact pot.

Plot devices should be a separate category, I agree. Hence Artifacts as a distinct class from items; an analogous class is needed (and arguably exists, in examples if not in explicit rules) for rituals and consumable items.

What is needed now is a resource for magic items. Having gold be part of the mix would be fine - it could cover finer gradations of power pretty well as a trade-off against consumable availability - but some limitation that leaves gold for rituals and consumables would help. Kicking magic items into DM candy land as "Artifacts, but less interesting" is just a horrible waste of a lesson that I thought had been learned from examining previous editions.

Items are character elements - they should be player, not DM, choices (limited, as with all other character elements, by resources). This is what they should always have been, in my strong opinion. It reduces hassle for the DM, increases fun for the players and adds a fun "party building" element not added by any other feature in the game. Items represent abilities used by the characters according to the tactics of the players to overcome in-game challenges - as such they are character elements, not setting or scenario elements. Punting them to the DM I find (a) the wrong place for them to be and (b) lazy, poor design.

Suffice it to say that I think your just not correct on this, that's all that really needs to be said. You want absolute player control of PCs and I think that a PC is a part of a campaign and the DM has some very good reasons to have input on that. It is neither lazy nor poor design. Nor do I believe it is a good idea to keep adding more resource subsystems that are all purely motivated by meta-game considerations to the game. THAT would IMHO be poor design. It leads to all kinds of additional extras and just more clutter and lack of clarity in the long run. "No, Nate, you can't have that rod you want because your 'mystical power points' would be exceeded, and that isn't balanced." is not a good answer. I'd also point out that you're not actually giving players more control of anything, you're just creating rigid rules-based restrictions that deny them the exact same thing that DM could deny them (and has the choice to NOT deny them).

I don't see XP as a good resource for any character element, really. Either the use of the element can lead to more XP earned - which is essentially the same as saying they're free - or those using these elements will progress more slowly, which will make them easily as unpopular as they are now.

Well, that was why I stated there would have to be some way to make it apply to the whole group. I'm not really advocating it anyway. It is however something to keep in mind. If there's some mechanism that will satisfy everyone it is going to be something more creative than more kinds of resources or let people work it out themselves with some guidelines.

 

[Lalato]

I would be perfectly happy with a rarity-based ritual system.

• Common rituals are low cost or free, but may take a lot of extra time. Maybe even a full day to cast some rituals.
• Uncommon rituals low to mid cost and may also take some extra time. Maybe extra hours to cast some rituals.
• Rare rituals are normal cost or may take less time to cast.

I would also add a skill check to all rituals to help mitigate some of the time involved. I mean... if I'm greatly skilled, why should a ritual take me just as long as the hedge wizard that barely knows a few rituals. Each ritual has a key skill... roll that check and if you meet a certain DC, you reduce the time to cast. I'm not a developer and don't delve into the math of it all much.

Anyway, those two things would make it work better for me.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

What about stealing a page from Monte Cook, and letting rituals have differing effects depending upon which version of the ritual you perform?

For instance, the abbreviated version of Knock would let a Mage "hold a charge" for a while, and enable him to open a single lock (or disarm a trap) as a minor action. And a caster could only have one abbreviated ritual held at a time. In contrast, the full, lengthy version of knock might be a burst effect.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

What about stealing a page from Monte Cook, and letting rituals have differing effects depending upon which version of the ritual you perform?

For instance, the abbreviated version of Knock would let a Mage "hold a charge" for a while, and enable him to open a single lock (or disarm a trap) as a minor action. And a caster could only have one abbreviated ritual held at a time. In contrast, the full, lengthy version of knock might be a burst effect.

I think there are a number of rituals that could stand to be tweaked. This would be one way that would probably work for certain ones. There are probably other ways to make some of the others somewhat more interesting. I'm not sure OVERALL though it is going to matter a huge amount about the details of individual rituals. Still, that seems like the most reasonable approach IMHO.

Honestly though, most of what I would do is just make rituals into a more important subsystem overall. Write adventures in ways that allows them to give the PCs significant advantages, open up more of the setting to exploration, increase the players buy-in to the story, etc. That is more about how things are done than the details of the system, but having items that interact with rituals, etc would all help.