|
4 months ago ::
Feb 06, 2013 - 6:22PM
#371
|
Date Joined:
Jun 28, 2006
|
That's too many. Nobody needs 162-180 spells to pick from in any given day. Half of intelligence score is more reasonable. It will make what spells you choose mean something. Also, if you can just change them willy nilly, it will also make spell choice meaningless. Maybe a wizard can swap out one spell when he gains a level.
Using Intelligence score as the limit makes it very close to the "Max # of Spells Known" table from 2e. But if you prefer to set a smaller limit, go right ahead.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 06, 2013 - 10:28PM
#372
|
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2012
|
In fact, the more I think about it the more I realise that limiting spells known might actually open up a whole lot of interesting design space for Wizards.
Could be wrong in how I'm reading into this, but it sounds like you're suggesting they take away spell slots then turn around and give them back (but only via feats). All that would accomplish is annihilating a Wizard's feat economy, which would likely outrage a lot of people (self included). I'd just rather they balance all of the spells (and casting) in a more reasonable fashion. Putting the clamps on the class's versatility and mechanics (instead of runaway/poorly-thought-out math) is just annoying.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 06, 2013 - 11:02PM
#373
|
Date Joined:
Oct 26, 2004
|
The problem is that there's no good way to balance unlimited spell access accross the wizard's traditional spectrum of spells. You either end up cutting the spells per day down to nothing, or the spells themselves into oblivion.
The only alternative to some sort of hard, and truly restrictive limit is to grant other classes the same ability to wrangle extra permanent versatility/power out of non character building resources (in game money and time).
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 07, 2013 - 1:24AM
#374
|
|
|
In fact, the more I think about it the more I realise that limiting spells known might actually open up a whole lot of interesting design space for Wizards.
Could be wrong in how I'm reading into this, but it sounds like you're suggesting they take away spell slots then turn around and give them back (but only via feats). All that would accomplish is annihilating a Wizard's feat economy, which would likely outrage a lot of people (self included). I'd just rather they balance all of the spells (and casting) in a more reasonable fashion. Putting the clamps on the class's versatility and mechanics (instead of runaway/poorly-thought-out math) is just annoying.
I'm not talking about "spell slots" or number of spells per level per day.
Though I DO think that a Feat allowing for an increase in spell slots 2 or more levels behind what you have as your highest (so if you can cast 3rd lvl spells you can add a 1st level slot) would be a good thing.
I'm talking about re-introducing the 2nd Edition limit on total spells known per spell level.
But with MUCH lower restrictions.
Int mod, or Int mod + a low number (1 - 3 perhaps) spells known per spell level max.
Or, perhaps, instead a higher limit on total spells known at ALL levels (allowing for people who only ever want the one 7th lvl spell to use to mix things up at different levels).
Then allowing the use of meta-game resources (like Feats, for example) to expand that selection for those who REALLY WANT to have huge spellbooks and all the advantages in flexibility and utility that brings with it.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 07, 2013 - 1:51AM
#375
|
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2012
|
I'm not sure bringing the spells as they used to exist in line is all that complicated. The concentration mechanic prevents abusive spell-stacking and a retuning of Save-or-Suck spells removes them from the realm of one-shottery; flesh to stone is a good example of this - polymorph is not. Balancing purely damaging spells just requires establishing what is to be expected of them on a level-by-level basis.
I would never support restricting a Wizard's spells known to a degree of 5-8 per level, though. That fundamentally changes the entire class concept (risk/reward tactician achieved through resource management) into a shadow of itself to the point that it feels like an unspontaneous Sorcerer. Granted, from the looks of the current packet, Wizards are already heading into Sorcerer territory with no signs of relenting (which is really a pity, imo), so most of my reservations are likely moot. If all else fails, I'll just take what works and frankenstein 2nd Edition into something a little more modern.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 07, 2013 - 1:53AM
#376
|
Date Joined:
Jun 21, 2012
|
Once the problem of Feats capping out at lvl 10 is fixed there will be a simple solution for anyone who REALLY WANTS to play a "more spells" character.
Spend Feats to get more spells.
That sounds totally fair.
There might even be a "generalist" Tradition who got more spells known as their "ability" instead of the bonuses offered by other Traditions.
In fact, the more I think about it the more I realise that limiting spells known might actually open up a whole lot of interesting design space for Wizards.
They did that for sorcs in 3e and it totally doesn't help, but it does depend on the other feat options out there.
The spell design would have to change if everyone had a sorc-like spell selection as well if you wanted to see a diverse set of casters all using different spells. You'd also have to work really hard to make each strategy work as well as the others. In many ways, the actual spells the wizard is picking from determines how necessary it is to limit the wizard.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 07, 2013 - 1:59AM
#377
|
|
|
In fact, the more I think about it the more I realise that limiting spells known might actually open up a whole lot of interesting design space for Wizards.
Could be wrong in how I'm reading into this, but it sounds like you're suggesting they take away spell slots then turn around and give them back (but only via feats). All that would accomplish is annihilating a Wizard's feat economy, which would likely outrage a lot of people (self included). I'd just rather they balance all of the spells (and casting) in a more reasonable fashion. Putting the clamps on the class's versatility and mechanics (instead of runaway/poorly-thought-out math) is just annoying.
I'm not talking about "spell slots" or number of spells per level per day.
Though I DO think that a Feat allowing for an increase in spell slots 2 or more levels behind what you have as your highest (so if you can cast 3rd lvl spells you can add a 1st level slot) would be a good thing.
I'm talking about re-introducing the 2nd Edition limit on total spells known per spell level.
But with MUCH lower restrictions.
Int mod, or Int mod + a low number (1 - 3 perhaps) spells known per spell level max.
Or, perhaps, instead a higher limit on total spells known at ALL levels (allowing for people who only ever want the one 7th lvl spell to use to mix things up at different levels).
Then allowing the use of meta-game resources (like Feats, for example) to expand that selection for those who REALLY WANT to have huge spellbooks and all the advantages in flexibility and utility that brings with it.
Yeah, move away from a mechanic that limits spells per spell level. That just sounds contrived and gamey.
Limiting the total number of spells regardless of level sounds more realistic. If there are low level spells that the player likes and wants to retain, then great. If not, they were unlikely to use it anyway.
Focus on the parts of the Wizard that players tend to use. Currently, all that dead wood of nigh unused and useless bookkeeping needs pruning.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 07, 2013 - 6:57AM
#378
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
Int mod, or Int mod + a low number (1 - 3 perhaps) spells known per spell level max.
I still think that this is a little too low, but...
Or, perhaps, instead a higher limit on total spells known at ALL levels (allowing for people who only ever want the one 7th lvl spell to use to mix things up at different levels).
This could be very interesting. Especially if you don't make it total spells known over all levels, but total spell LEVELS known over all levels. If you want to sacrifice a 8th level spell known, you could learn an extra 3rd, 2 2nd and 1 1st level spell. If you make it so that they cannot forget spells already learned, or perhaps limit it to one forgotten spell per level gained, it would make it so that you if you choose to learn too many spells early on, you have already sacrificed some higher spell slots by the time you get there.
You could also cap the total spells per spell level at INT or half INT just to keep it from getting out of hand early on.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 07, 2013 - 8:46AM
#379
|
Date Joined:
Sep 19, 2011
|
I believe that the problem with magic in D&D is that with all the various books you have waves of recolors of old spells why have 12 spells that shoot a fireball or change a persons appearance? If they are going to add more spells it should be spells that bring something new to the game and limiting a wizard from acquiring them in his books is silly because he does not know all of them and he may even not know where he left the incantation for said spells if he has dozens of spellbooks that he has spells written in.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 07, 2013 - 9:01AM
#380
|
Date Joined:
Apr 10, 2009
|
As I've said before: The change to 'most damage spells can be scaled' means that a limit on total spells known (rather than spells knowable per level) makes more sense now.
I still prefer the limit to be twice as many as the wizard can prepare at their current level.
I could probably be convinced to increase this to three times the number they can prepare.
For comparison purposes - two times the amount they can prepare would be roughly four spells per spell level - if they spread them all out equally, which of course they do not have to do.
Three times the amount they can prepare would be six spells per spell level.
I am good with either option.
I also think that more spells need to be made scaleable (and every spell that is made scaleable adds to the flexibility of a wizard in a limited known spells system).
/stops to contemplate the fact that the limit in 4E was two per spell level (three with a feat). And wonders why it seems no one else thought that was excessively limiting..../
Carl
|
|
|
