|
1 year ago ::
May 03, 2012 - 10:54AM
#31
|
Date Joined:
Nov 15, 2007
|
I'm sorry, but I couldn't get past your first sentence. Why wouldn't the Wizard be EQUAL to the Fighter at something. Before 4E the Wizard in EVERY way imaginable far exceeded the Fighter. So now that the Fighter is going to be best at something apparently those that prefer a previous edition have a problem.
Thank you.
Now I know why I love 4E so much.
D&D Next: The Revenge Edition. The chance for all those selfish conceited people who didn't like 4E to push people out of the game. Because it was so wrong for them to be pushed out for an edition it's nw the right thing for them to push others out.
Because you like something, it does not mean it is good.
Because you dislike something, it does not mean it is bad.
Because it is your opinion, it does not make it everyone's opinion.
Because it is your opinion, it does not make it truth.
Because it is your opinion, it does not make it the general consensus.
Whatever side you want to take, at least remember these things.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 03, 2012 - 11:06AM
#32
|
|
|
I'm sorry, but I couldn't get past your first sentence. Why wouldn't the Wizard be EQUAL to the Fighter at something. Before 4E the Wizard in EVERY way imaginable far exceeded the Fighter. So now that the Fighter is going to be best at something apparently those that prefer a previous edition have a problem.
Thank you.
Now I know why I love 4E so much.
There's a good argument that Wizards are still better in 4th as well, but perhaps by not as large a margin.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 04, 2012 - 9:00AM
#33
|
Date Joined:
Jun 16, 2007
|
Huh. This idea is very similar to the one I had. I'm gonna make the call that it means we're both super smart. My idea was that spells start out as piddly little shrunken versions of what you'd expect; for instance, fireball would have a range of Area burst 0 in 2. However, all spellcasters would come equipped with options to enhance spells, called Metamagic. You'd apply them before the spell is cast, like weaving a basket or concocting a witch's brew. You'd throw in a Heighten here and a Far there, and of course a couple Enlarges. Then you'd let the spell fly once it has reached the state you want. Each metamagic would take a turn to cast, so you'd be spending your turns preparing the spell.
Yours is a simpler system, though. I still prefer mine, but yours is probably better for D&D. Mine's the kind that works as a houserule.
I don't use emoticons, and I'm also pretty pleasant. So if I say something that's rude or insulting, it's probably a joke.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 07, 2012 - 5:39PM
#34
|
Date Joined:
Mar 26, 2004
|
An idea:
Drop the concept of spell levels. Simply have spells, that a wizard can cast at any level equal to or less than his or her caster class level. Have spells increase in power if they are cast at a higher level. Give the wizard a waiting time for higher level cast spells equal to the level cast at.
Take the 2nd Chromatic Orb (I prefer 1st ed as there were 12 levels instead of 9, gave us more to look forward to as we leveled)
Table 16: Chromatic Orb Effects
Level of Color of Orb Hit Points Special
Caster Generated of Damage Power
1st White 1-4 Light
2nd Red 1-6 Heat
3rd Orange 1-8 Fire
4th Yellow 1-10 Blindness
5th Green 1-12 Stinking Cloud
6th Turquoise 2-8 Magnetism
7th Blue 2-16 Paralysis
8th Violet slow Petrification
9th Black paralysis Death
Let the caster cast the 1st level version all he or she wants, but if he or she casts the 9th level version he or she has to wait 9 rounds before casting the 9th level version again.
So you propose a kind of MMO type "cooldown" system for spells that don't basically have any levels. But giving spells cooldown means monitoring all those cooldowns round by round by the player and/or DM. It will be a taxing issue once you hit the upper experience levels and in big fights. And I think it will be illogical to make the cooldowns in units of rounds. Casting a 9th level death spell in every 54 seconds, from dawn to dusk? I think no.
Your initial approach is quite good, though. I was also thinking about designing the spells without levels. But instead of any cooldown, i was thinking of spending spell points to cast spells at a given level. These spell points are based on intelligence and constitution and at 1st level you have spell points equal to double the sum of your int and con modifiers. You gain spell points equal to your int modifier when you level up. By spending these spell points you cast spells at a level you want. Spend 3 points to cast a spell as a 3rd level, spend another 5 to cast another at 5th level etc. You still memorize spells but how much powerful they are depends on your spell point allocation. What happens when you're out of points? You simply regain a quarter of your spell points per hour of noncombat activity. If you can manage to put enough inactive time between your combat encounters, you can avoid running out of spells. If you do, you can still spend your actual constitution as if it is spell points to cast more spells. If your constitution reaches zero, though, you are exhausted and need a full rest to recover.
I've never played a MMO so cannot comment on that. The "cooldown" was in response to the OP. However, in our game we do houserule using spell points. Similar to what you have posted. What we do when you run out of spell points is that you can continue casting, you take 1 HP damage for each spell point over your limit.
One thing I've been thinking about for 5E is the possibility of having an additional magic attribute that magic users will have to maintain. If you have your base 6 attributes and 4d6 to roll for each of them, a magic user would have to lessen a die or dice from one or more attributes to have dice to roll for his or her magic attribute. The spells you cast could could not exceed your magic attribute score. Want that 1st ed Chromatic Orb at level 12 have a score of 12 in your magic attribute. Want a d20 fireball have an attribute of 20.
You could do the same for clerics by having a divine attribute, and then a luck attribute for everyone else if they wanted to use it.
Also to differentiate between the various kinds of casters, you could have casting ability tied to a feat.
Arcane spell casting -- allows you to cast arcane spells
Limited arcane spell casting -- choose one type of spell, you can only cast that type of spell (such as illusion), if you choose this feat you cannot have arcane spell casting as a feat.
Conjuring -- allows you to conjure elementals
Summoning -- allows you to summon beings from the outer planes.
With the conjuring and summoning the being/creature brought forth cannot have more HD than your magic attribute.
You could limit conjuring and summoning to specific types, you can do the same with divine spells as well.
Having this would allow you to create an all purpose wizard who does everything, or one that just casts spells, or one that only summons devils. There would be no need for umpteen different kinds of caster classes/prestige classes.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 08, 2012 - 10:03AM
#35
|
|
|
This is how I'd like the Sorcerers and other spontaneous casters to play. The overchanneling mechanic seems like something they'd (they be sorcerers) do.
But it isn't for wizards. For wizards the spells per day idea worked well (well, well enough). Personally I think all that you need to do to fix the wizard is make it more costly to learn new spells (in 3.x you only learned two at level up, 3 if you were a specialist) as oppossed to just walking into a bookstore and going I need one of this and that. Sure a wizard could buff himself into a oblivion still but the oppurtunity cost to do so and be on par in melee with a fighter are utility spells and evocations. Make a wizard learning a new spell something to prized and sought after like a fighter who finds a magical longsword. Sure this doesn't solve all the problems but it lowers the curve.
Very much agreed. But I also think that other classes could be given unique, if perhaps, far more abstract rewards of equally great importance.
Several examples:
- A sorcerer could unlock some of his latent powers by defeating a dragon or some other powerful magic foe.
- A Cleric may gain some divine inspiration when meditating during his deity's holiday.
- A fighter might be taught some special moves after rescuing the over-adventurous son of a master in forbidden martial arts.
Actually I implement those sort of things in my current campaign, for example when the cleric and the wizard both pray to their god (magic in this world all comes from the divine, just some gods, i.e those of magic, give "arcane" spells) at an actual temple or altar when they prep their spells there is a chance that their god heard their prayers and gave them some expanded ability (all based on a d100 roll, 0-5 god didn't hear the prayer, 6-24 extra spell equal to two levels lower than highest spell slot, 25-75 extra spell slot equal to one level lower than highest spell slot, 76-99 extra spell slot equal to highest spell slot, 100 extra spell slot equal to highest spell slot plus one).
Honestly though I think everything boils down to the DM and whether S/He knows what they are doing and are able to handle their players. I mean honestly in my group whenever a wizard or cleric was getting out of hand and stealing the limelight from everyone the DM would step in and do something about it. For example ever see a wizard survive long without their spellbook? In big cities there are bound to be thieves who know that those funny dressed people carry a big book worth its weight in platinum (100gp/page filled, no real markdown since its not really "used" goods). Just saying.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 08, 2012 - 2:44PM
#36
|
|
|
This is how I'd like the Sorcerers and other spontaneous casters to play. The overchanneling mechanic seems like something they'd (they be sorcerers) do.
But it isn't for wizards. For wizards the spells per day idea worked well (well, well enough). Personally I think all that you need to do to fix the wizard is make it more costly to learn new spells (in 3.x you only learned two at level up, 3 if you were a specialist) as oppossed to just walking into a bookstore and going I need one of this and that. Sure a wizard could buff himself into a oblivion still but the oppurtunity cost to do so and be on par in melee with a fighter are utility spells and evocations. Make a wizard learning a new spell something to prized and sought after like a fighter who finds a magical longsword. Sure this doesn't solve all the problems but it lowers the curve.
Very much agreed. But I also think that other classes could be given unique, if perhaps, far more abstract rewards of equally great importance.
Several examples:
- A sorcerer could unlock some of his latent powers by defeating a dragon or some other powerful magic foe.
- A Cleric may gain some divine inspiration when meditating during his deity's holiday.
- A fighter might be taught some special moves after rescuing the over-adventurous son of a master in forbidden martial arts.
Actually I implement those sort of things in my current campaign, for example when the cleric and the wizard both pray to their god (magic in this world all comes from the divine, just some gods, i.e those of magic, give "arcane" spells) at an actual temple or altar when they prep their spells there is a chance that their god heard their prayers and gave them some expanded ability (all based on a d100 roll, 0-5 god didn't hear the prayer, 6-24 extra spell equal to two levels lower than highest spell slot, 25-75 extra spell slot equal to one level lower than highest spell slot, 76-99 extra spell slot equal to highest spell slot, 100 extra spell slot equal to highest spell slot plus one).
Honestly though I think everything boils down to the DM and whether S/He knows what they are doing and are able to handle their players. I mean honestly in my group whenever a wizard or cleric was getting out of hand and stealing the limelight from everyone the DM would step in and do something about it. For example ever see a wizard survive long without their spellbook? In big cities there are bound to be thieves who know that those funny dressed people carry a big book worth its weight in platinum (100gp/page filled, no real markdown since its not really "used" goods). Just saying.
Again your trying to storytell the game into balance which requires the DM to be 2-3 times as clever as the players. What do you do when the wizard tattoos their spells on their body?
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 08, 2012 - 2:54PM
#37
|
|
|
This is how I'd like the Sorcerers and other spontaneous casters to play. The overchanneling mechanic seems like something they'd (they be sorcerers) do.
But it isn't for wizards. For wizards the spells per day idea worked well (well, well enough). Personally I think all that you need to do to fix the wizard is make it more costly to learn new spells (in 3.x you only learned two at level up, 3 if you were a specialist) as oppossed to just walking into a bookstore and going I need one of this and that. Sure a wizard could buff himself into a oblivion still but the oppurtunity cost to do so and be on par in melee with a fighter are utility spells and evocations. Make a wizard learning a new spell something to prized and sought after like a fighter who finds a magical longsword. Sure this doesn't solve all the problems but it lowers the curve.
Very much agreed. But I also think that other classes could be given unique, if perhaps, far more abstract rewards of equally great importance.
Several examples:
- A sorcerer could unlock some of his latent powers by defeating a dragon or some other powerful magic foe.
- A Cleric may gain some divine inspiration when meditating during his deity's holiday.
- A fighter might be taught some special moves after rescuing the over-adventurous son of a master in forbidden martial arts.
Actually I implement those sort of things in my current campaign, for example when the cleric and the wizard both pray to their god (magic in this world all comes from the divine, just some gods, i.e those of magic, give "arcane" spells) at an actual temple or altar when they prep their spells there is a chance that their god heard their prayers and gave them some expanded ability (all based on a d100 roll, 0-5 god didn't hear the prayer, 6-24 extra spell equal to two levels lower than highest spell slot, 25-75 extra spell slot equal to one level lower than highest spell slot, 76-99 extra spell slot equal to highest spell slot, 100 extra spell slot equal to highest spell slot plus one).
Honestly though I think everything boils down to the DM and whether S/He knows what they are doing and are able to handle their players. I mean honestly in my group whenever a wizard or cleric was getting out of hand and stealing the limelight from everyone the DM would step in and do something about it. For example ever see a wizard survive long without their spellbook? In big cities there are bound to be thieves who know that those funny dressed people carry a big book worth its weight in platinum (100gp/page filled, no real markdown since its not really "used" goods). Just saying.
Again your trying to storytell the game into balance which requires the DM to be 2-3 times as clever as the players. What do you do when the wizard tattoos their spells on their body?
Institute rules that they can do this, but one spell takes up their tattoo item slot, so that's all they get.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 08, 2012 - 2:56PM
#38
|
|
|
I remember there was a concept for spells that do different things or having stronger control effects depending on how much damage the target has taken.
What if there were similar spells that worked that way for a player or a monster? When you're 'bloodied' your spells do +x more damage because you're furious or your bloodlust has come out or whatever.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 08, 2012 - 3:23PM
#39
|
Date Joined:
Sep 26, 2001
|
Before 4E the Wizard in EVERY way imaginable far exceeded the Fighter. So now that the Fighter is going to be best at something apparently those that prefer a previous edition have a problem.
Thank you.
Now I know why I love 4E so much.
There's a good argument that Wizards are still better in 4th as well, but perhaps by not as large a margin.
I suspect I'll be pretty easy to convince, but that's an argument I wouldn't mind hearing... 
Love 4e? Concerned about its future? Join the Old Guard of 4e"You want The Tooth? You can't handle The Tooth!" - Dahlver-Nar. "If magic is unrestrained in the campaign, D&D quickly degenerates into a weird wizard show where players get bored quickly" - E. Gary Gygax
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 08, 2012 - 3:35PM
#40
|
|
|
Before 4E the Wizard in EVERY way imaginable far exceeded the Fighter. So now that the Fighter is going to be best at something apparently those that prefer a previous edition have a problem.
Thank you.
Now I know why I love 4E so much.
There's a good argument that Wizards are still better in 4th as well, but perhaps by not as large a margin.
I suspect I'll be pretty easy to convince, but that's an argument I wouldn't mind hearing...
The most effective party I've played in is six wizards and one of them wasn't optimized at all. The others were, but some were bizarre concepts like hybrid monk|wizard (slow prone with a net lots of movement) and hybrid fighter|wizard (grabby grabby).
|
|
|
