The Fifteen Minute Adventuring Day...


Alpha Release 1 General Discussion

51 to 100 of 151 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

This might make better sense than my first post.

Wizards spell recovery
Class Levels 0-5
Recover 1 spell (level 0-3) with 1 hour of rest with DC 15 Spellcraft check

Class Levels 6-10
Recover 2 spells (level 0-3) with 1 hour of rest with DC 15 Spellcraft check

Class Levels 11-15
Recover 2 spells (level 0-3) with 1 hour of rest with DC 15 Spellcraft check
Or
Recover 1 spell (level 4-6) with 1 hour of rest with DC 20 Spellcraft check

Class Levels 16-20
Recover 4 spells (level 0-3) with 1 hour of rest with DC 15 Spellcraft check
Or
Recover 2 spells (level 4-6) with 1 hour of rest with DC 20 Spellcraft check

I think something like this could be adapted for HP recovery as well.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

There isn't a problem to fix. If you attempt to fix this problem, you end up with a 4E like system (with unlimited at will powers.)

I play more than half my characters as spell casters and I've never had a problem with the way encounters are done.

It is wrong for spell casters to gain more than a single days worth of their spells in a given day and it is mostly the fault of the player for running out before the 4th or 5th encounter in a day.

Scarab Sages

Jason Bulmahn wrote:

Well, we tried a number of moves to counteract this problem and I am eager to start getting some playtest feedback on how they work. The domains and schools are both designed to give the clerics and wizards a bit more to do, allowing them to choose when to use their spells, instead of being forced to use them because of a lack of options. The turning healing was also designed to alleviate some of this burden.

Give em a try and let me know how they work.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

In our game yesterday, I was playing a Wizard and the Hand of the Apprentice ability allowed me to actually continue to participate in the fights. As you stated above Jason, I saved my spells till I wanted to cast them, not because I needed to. Our cleric said he felt completely useless with out his Touch of Chaos ability. It was nice that the two of us were able to still use magic-like abilities without having to worry about our spells. As for the whole "15 minute adventuring day", that was untrue for our group. The only reason we rested was because two of our members were suffering from multiple ability score damage from poison and we just leveled (our DM doesn't let us gain our new level abilities until we rest).

Sovereign Court Wayfinder, PaizoCon Founder

James Risner wrote:


I play more than half my characters as spell casters and I've never had a problem with the way encounters are done.

It is wrong for spell casters to gain more than a single days worth of their spells in a given day and it is mostly the fault of the player for running out before the 4th or 5th encounter in a day.

Then you must have incredibly relaxed DMs... ;-)

I'm playing in two different campaigns, and in both we've had the spellcasters, halfway through the session, resort to pulling out the ol' light crossbow and just sitting on the sidelines, waiting to shoot into melee. It wasn't a failing on the players; the DMs just kept up the intensity, by throwing the enemies at us.

I think there needs to be an OPTION to get some spell power back when the cards are down, and you're in dire straits.


We have been working with this exact problem in our group, and if the Pathfinder RPG comes up with a workable solution I'm going to skip out on 4e for good.

What we do in our group is this:
Use the spell point system from the SRD (with a couple modifications)
Casters regain a number of spell points (equal to their caster level) after 1 hour of non-strenuous activity.

The system works quite well.

Another option would be to Allow Cleric Domain and Wizards School powers to be the only per/encounter abilities. And give casters some flexibility over what their domain/school powers are for each level.


I'm for leaving the Vancian system as is. It is fundamental to D&D 3.5 as well as the compatability of pathfinder's intent (at least in my opinion on the latter). The 15 minute adventuring day has never been a problem in any campaigns I ran. There are so many ways that a spell caster can contribute with the system as is... especially with scribing scrolls, and the use of staffs and wands and other magic items. It has been a long time since we have played with low level characters, but in my current campaign, the characters are of 15th and 16th level, and I have yet to see the spell casters suggest calling it quits before continuing because they can't contribute. I can see the problem of contributing spell casters "past 15 minutes" at lower levels as characters have a small selection of spells. Again, I think this is still aleviated through the obtaining of scrolls and rewarding of magic implements by a judicious GM or whipping out the ol' Crossbow.

I just don't see a need to throw out or greatly alter the Vancian system. I do not think it is one of the things that is broken in 3.5 and Pathfinder needs to seriously address.

I would be more open to enhancing and adding rules and mechanics and making very slight tweaks to the current rules rather than seeing a complete overhaul, or adding a mechanic that nerfs the concept of the Vancian system. I would rather see, the addition of "action" feats for spell casters or building on the implement concept to come up with something to keep casters useful after 15 minutes of adventuring if the community feels the need for something to be done.

Messing with the fundamentals of the Vancian system is not a good way to go IMHO.

Scarab Sages

Timitius wrote:
I think there needs to be an OPTION to get some spell power back when the cards are down, and you're in dire straits.

Then you should come hang out in the Casting Beyond Daily Limits thread.

Scarab Sages

anthony Valente wrote:
I would be more open to enhancing and adding rules and mechanics and making very slight tweaks to the current rules rather than seeing a complete overhaul, or adding a mechanic that nerfs the concept of the Vancian system. I would rather see, the addition of "action" feats for spell casters or building on the implement concept to come up with something to keep casters useful after 15 minutes of adventuring if the community feels the need for something to be done.

I think Reserve Feats are a great idea to help ease the pain of Vancian casting ;)

I never really liked the idea of "preparing" spells the way it's done in D&D. The sorcerer is more fun for me to play, although I wish the spell selection was better.

My point, really, is that Reserve Feats give you a small (sometimes scaling) magic effect as long as you have a spell of a certain type and level available. So you can save your big shot stuff for when you really need it, and do small firebursts (or whatever) for dealing with the rabble ... until you start dipping into the spells that are powering your reserve magic.

Sadly, there are nowhere near enough Reserve Feats currently available to really cover all the bases. Some day, there will be more.

( oh, yes ... )


Remove the XP cost for scribing scrolls. Make item creation feats cheaper. Then when the party doesn't bother scribing scrolls and making potions, of course they will run out of spells. 4E addressed this, but it just came off feeling...odd.

use of scrolls, potions, and wands is the counter balance to the 15 minute adventuring day. How many DM's out there have had players die with a backpack full of gear that *could* have saved the day?

This problem is a PC prep problem, not broken rules. Wizard need something to do every round? Use a 5th or 7th level wand of magic missiles..or fireballs...or lightning...or frost. They aren't very expensive, and are extremely useful.

Am I missing something?


grrtigger wrote:


I love Reserve Feats. I wish there were 800,000 more of them. Allowing those as options for the class power slots would make them a lot more customizable yet also (in theory) balanced.

I vote this!

I agree. I have houseruled in free reserve feats every 3rd level for wizards in my campaign; actually, they get a choice of taking a reserve feat or a craft item feat.


I too, LOVE reserve feats. Lets see more of them. Especially higher level ones that could in theory replace commonly used lower level spells.

The problem with relying on player equipment to eliminate the 15 minute day is that it assumes all DM's give out equipment in an equal manner. In reality, some DMs keep the loot coming, while others are quite stingy.

Many DMs (Myself included) frequently throw challenges at the party based on what the party is capable of doing, throw-away encounters that are just designed to get the players to burn a few charges of their wands are not nearly as fun as when the party has to work hard to survive or surely die.

Scarab Sages

Krome wrote:

In an other thread I suggested spells be per encounter rather than per day for that exact reason.

An encounter is to be designed upon the assumption that PCs have access to all of their abilities. So turn that around in actual play and make it so.

If a DM wants to weaken a party before the BBEG part just have the two encounters combine as one. Stretch it out over initiative to keep it all one encounter.

Some have said that is too much of an increase in power, but in all honesty I don't see that at all.

What is different between making it encounter based and per day based where the PCs retreat after every 2-3 encounters to come back all fresh and smelling clean?

Nothing really, and it is more fun.

I'm sure that this has been mentioned before but the current version of Star Wars has a system like this for Force Powers. It is per encounter also and it seems to work well. The real issue for this is the way magic works in Dungeons and Dragons. You would have to get rid of the Spells per day and damage based on spell level. Heck, while you're at just give rid of levels all together. Make the magic system work a little more on an "effect" based system and allow the players to create their own spells on the fly with a special system. I know that leads to abuse but so does dropping all your really big spells in every encounter. Could you imagine a 20th Level wizard with all of his spells all the time. By the fighter with his 15-20ft Move rate got to the enemy they would be toast with him moping up the twitching corpses.

Unfortunately I don't have a solution for this short of creating my own rules system but I would love to see some suggestions that would work in the d20 system.


Never had issue with it. Part of being the wizard was choosing when to cast your higher level spells and when to do something else. Sure, you don't want to get into melee.. but plan ahead.. make and save wands.. use ranged attacks. I always found those that cast their only two fireball spells in the first two rounds of the first fight encounter not playing their wizards smart. I don't know... just the way I see it.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Lord Zeb wrote:

Personally, I think this is the best answer to the 15 minute day.

Man, UA is awesome as a tool box to pull from!

Recharge Magic would keep the group going all day long, without futzing with the core Vancian system.

Vecna would be pleased! :P

This is a good varient. Actually I like this alot and think that with a bit of tweaking it could be the total solution.

If the problem is that Wizards run out of high level spells early, and the lower level spells are virtually useless in combat, maybe the solution is to allow the wizard to 'trade up' on spell levels.

The wizard would memorize spells as normal, but if he needed to he could trade out a certain number of low level spells to re-gain access to a spent high level spell. Actually now that I think of it, didn't Monte Cook come up with something like this for Arcana Unearthed/Evolved?

If you combined the recharge magic with the ability to trade-up spell slots, I think you could easily keep your caster going all day long...not just 15 minutes.

Dark Archive

Lance Schroeder wrote:

If the problem is that Wizards run out of high level spells early, and the lower level spells are virtually useless in combat, maybe the solution is to allow the wizard to 'trade up' on spell levels.

The wizard would memorize spells as normal, but if he needed to he could trade out a certain number of low level spells to re-gain access to a spent high level spell. Actually now that I think of it, didn't Monte Cook come up with something like this for Arcana Unearthed/Evolved?

It is. In AU/E, magisters can burn two lower level spell slots for one higher or one higher level slot for two lower ones. There are restrictions, though.

Such a system would be fairly easily to implement with PRPG: wizards would take a full-action round to burn lower spell slots to replenish an upper one, with the number of slots burned equal to the upper level slot (i.e., two 1st level spell slots for one 2nd level slot; three 2nd level slots for a 3rd level slot, etc.).

Note that such a system would be backward-compatible to 3.5; there's nothing to add to the stat block. The DM would just mark off prepared spells from the monsters/NPCs spell lists when they want to replenish a higher level spell slot.


I wrote (a long time ago) a "spell-point" system for AD&D; but that is most likely too much deviation from D&D for Piazo to consider it. The basics (without getting into too much detail) from when I translated it into 3.x went something like this:

Wizards/Sorcerers get "mana" (I combined the classes); they get 1d6+INT bonus per level of spellcaster they attain.

Clerics/Druids get "piety" (again, I combined the classes); they get 1d6+WIS bonus per level of spellcaster they attain.

Spells cost mana/piety equal to (1+level)^2. In other words:

Cantrip/Orison = 1 point
Level 1 spell = 4 points
Level 2 spell = 9 points
...
Level 8 spell = 81 points
Level 9 spell = 100 points

Next...

Spells are learned much like skills. Buy them with skill points (1 skill point = 1 spell learned). You cannot know as many or more spells of a given level than you know of the level below it (in other words, to learn a total of 4 level 3 spells meant you had to know at least 5 level 2 spells, 6 level 1 spells, and 7 cantrips or orisons).

Spellcraft is divided into two skills: Spellcraft (Arcane), and Spellcraft (Divine). This is used to actually cast the spells.

Casting a spell required a Spellcraft roll. The DC for each spell is 6 + 3/spell level. In other words:

Cantrip/Orison - DC 6
Level 1 spell = DC 9
Level 2 spell = DC 12
...
Level 8 spell = DC 27
Level 9 spell = DC 30

---
Note on combined classes: Wizard and Sorcerer were combined without work, really. Cleric and Druid meant I had to have a series of "special abilities" that were gained mush as Druids do, only specified per diety involved. It was fun, really.


Well, to address the HP problem, I offer the following suggestion.

Split hit points in half. The "top" half is a recoverable pool that can regenerate with a bit of a break between encounters (maybe 15 minutes?). The "bottom" half are the hit points that function as normal.

What does this do? After every fight, the characters will be at a minimum of 50% of their hit points. There is less of a need for clerics if you know that you'll have a reasonable amount of hit points even if you got mauled in the last fight. At the same time, you can be worn down from fight to fight as the top buffer is torn away and the foes get to the crunchy goodness inside...which makes clerics a handy but not absolutely necessary thing to have.

For backward compatability...well, most foes aren't going to last beyond one encounter, so there's no need to split their HP. For a reoccurring foe, or one that runs away and returns, it's not hard to split the HP pool after the fact to figure out how many HP they have when they show up next.


Keep the Vancian Magic sytem. I have played D&D in whatever edition for nearly 30 years. It is the magic system for the game and it is the magic system that spawned countless other magic systems in an effort to best it. Has it been bested? Absolutely. Should it stay as a part of the "new" D&D? Again, absolutely. I am extremely disappointed with the drive of a faceless corporation that thinks I need to have a new system to replace the one that I cannot possibly enjoy because they say so. I have been capable of making rational decision for myself for at least a couple of decades. In fact, I would wager I have been making decisions longer than some of the "designers" of 4.enough have been alive. The Vancian magic system is not perfect, but it is D&D and it should stay. Having said that...

I really like the variation to Domain/School Magic and the progressive improvement that Jason has created. It does give spellcasters a little extra juice to keep going for longer than the "15 minute day".

Also, it should not be forgotten that we are playing a ROLE-PLAYING GAME. To me, it means there is more than just combat. It is not a First-Person Shoot'em Up. If you choose to play a spellcaster, you should understand the need to utilize your abilities to their maximum.

Finally, given the low cost of scrolls and the ability to purchase them or create them, a spellcaster can have additional resources if she really wants.

If the new PRPG is to remain as close to 3.5 and backwards compatible, the magic system needs to stay as close to the same as possible.


What about something like a "quick recovery" feat or ability, that lets e.g. the spellcaster learn/regain/pray for one spell per caster level (or similar) per day at a rate of 1 round per spell level? I just love the idea of the following scenario: The party is desperately trying to hold the attackers off, while the wizards memorizes the spell that could save them all from his spellbook.

That doesn't make the adventuring day a lot longer for low-level parties though, but I like the dramaturgy ;).

Scarab Sages

I think it needs to be said ( and i apologize if it already has. I just had time to skim the thread) that the true solution to the 15 minute adventuring day lies with DMs and their players. This style of play is an abuse of the spirit of the rules. Rather than rewriting the rules to prevent such munchkin-like behavior, I think it would be more prudent to provide advice on how to adapt play style to discourage such behavior.

I have always structured my adventures so as to severely penalize players for doing 3 rooms and camping. The monsters or enemies, now alerted to the PCs budding assault, will often counter attack & interrupt the party's rest. Besides upsetting the party & interrupting rest for spell replacement, this demonstrates that their actions are not in a vacuum. Also, I have long interpreted the rules to indicate that you must be awake for a 'day' before camping. If you couldn't sleep an hour after waking in the real world, there is no reason to assume this would be possible just because it would be a beneficial mechanical exploit.

As for the players, they need to adapt as well. My players spend more of their wealth on disposable magic items. Scrolls, potions and wands extend the ability of the party to adventure well beyond the 15 minute day. In addition, my players have had to learn to conserve resources and meet a challenge with the minimum appropriate level of force. Fireballing 2 goblin scouts because it is the 1st fight and you can is wasteful and foolish. Players need to husband their resources so that they can handle whatever surprises develop during an adventure.

Finally, players need to use their class features intelligently. Our rouge/monk/sneaky git will usually carefully scout (sometimes with magical aid if my players choose to scry) the next several encounter areas so as to identify which fights can be bypassed, which pose the potential or raising an alert, and how they can best proceed. Such intelligent play has allowed my players, even at low level, to have a full adventuring day without any rule modifications.

Perhaps instead of new rules, what we need is for some of the designers to produce some playing and DMing guidelines to help address this problem.

The 'Ling


C'mon guys, Wizards get basically unlimited scrolls from 1st (and now at-will zaps like Warlocks instead of the crossbow), Clerics and Druids make capable grunts, you can buy wands in the cities to augment your endurance.

If your players enjoy spending everything on one or two fights and calling it a day, what's the problem? If you want them to keep going, give them a reason to.

If you and they really don't like how 3e plays at all, 4e's over there -> somewhere. But then, I like the way it works out now, as long as I can ban the Wand of Cure Light Wounds.


I will say 4th edition seems to actually make the problem worse then better. They didn’t kill vancian magic, it’s more like they gave it to every class instead.

However, I do think this is an issue, since there are so many people, including myself who are unhappy with the current system.

I’ve already heard good suggestions about having a simple check to restore a small number of lost spells when the party gets a few minutes of down time.

If this is combined with the ability for every class partially heal himself outside of combat, making spell casters that can heal in battle more important, it would eliminate a lot of down time.

Sovereign Court

The best low-level wizard i've ever played with (and later DMed for) was in a campaign with what you might call "active environments". Our wizard would step back in combat and consider the wider picture whilst we were slugging it out in front of him. Once he'd evaluated the situation he'd pull out a spell/jam a door/change a magic circle/activate a trap/empty a desk/untie a captive/etc.

It really gave a sense that his character was the smartest guy in the room.

I'm currently playing a ninja who isn't ever combat effective. But I don't demand that we rest permanently because i'm never combat useful.


snowyak wrote:


I've never seen a mage fall back to crosbows or other normal weapons.

I certainly have seen it - and done it. But I'm beginning to wonder if it is a "generational issue" or one of attention span.

I have even had a wizard take archery feats so that he was better with his crossbow and could provide better non-spellcasting support during melee encounters.

There is quite a bit of precedent in heroic fantasy fiction for limited spell use per day. In many novels, the spellcasters are weakened and drained of energy as they cast their spells.

I personally do not want a "mana bar that recharges after each encounter" type of game. As others have said, if that system appeals to a particular player, 4th Edition should scratch that itch.

If Pathfinder is going to have any true claim to being in the tradition of original D&D and backwards compatibility, it needs to stick with limited spells per day.

Also, the better DMs will often incorporate non-artificial reasons that it may not be in the party's best interest to "rest & recover" several times per game session.

"Well, you could spend another night here, but remember that your mission is to rescue the princess alive. Each day you linger allows him to get further away or perhaps kill her."

The game is about making tough decisions with limited resources.

If the wizard can cast his fireball spell (or some equivalent) EVERY encounter, where's the resource management decision?


underling wrote:
I think it needs to be said ( and i apologize if it already has. I just had time to skim the thread) that the true solution to the 15 minute adventuring day lies with DMs and their players. This style of play is an abuse of the spirit of the rules. Rather than rewriting the rules to prevent such munchkin-like behavior, I think it would be more prudent to provide advice on how to adapt play style to discourage such behavior.

Seems to me that you're advocating an approach that forces character choices and play style to be restricted by the way the rules are written, instead of writing rules that allow people to play the way they want. The rules currently encourage the type of play that you say is an abuse of the spirit of the rules.

Here's an analogy - do you tell a gunfighter that although he's got six bullets in his gun, he can only use one because there are more challengers waiting? In a life or death situation, I don't begrudge a wizard the decision to use most of his high-level spells, then finding a secure place to rest in order to reload.

I don't agree with all of the 4E design choices. However, they did recognize that if you want to simulate the classic bits of the fantasy genre, you need to give the characters a way to keep going after multiple battles. Their solution was healing surges and per-encounter powers. I would like to see Pathfinder come up with a solution that lets people enter a fight with a decent amount of hit points, not have to run to the cleric after *every* battle (or have people buy tons of 1st level CLW wands), and structure spellcasting so people don't just unload with their full arsenal at the start of every challenging fight.


As a player, I never want to have to take out a crossbow and miss over and over again. If I want to conceal my magic, that's fine, but it shouldn't be required. I think that the at-will domain and school powers at first level are a great step. I think that a further step should be made by removing some of the higher level abilities and replacing them with more powerful at-will spells.

The at-will powers don't need to be amazingly powerful; they simply need to be enough to continue to have a meaningful effect once the spells are gone. Yes, when the cleric and wizard are out of spells and the fighter at half hit points, the party should rest, but if the wizard has three nifty tools to use at-will, the party won't have to rest once he's out just so the player can still feel like he's having an effect.

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Quick note to Mr. Bulmahn, as you're skimming: Don't give wizards more at-will magic, unless you can readjust the power differential between them and fighting classes.

Also, the limited firepower of spellcasters allows adventure design and DM's to control an aspect of tension around the table, which is good.

--
More detailed response: I agree that the "fifteen-minute work day" is a play consideration, not one of game design. If people think the "problem" needs to be addressed, then DM's and other players will need to be the ones to address it.

Most of my table-play has seen the fighter turn around and say something like "What art thou talking about, mage? I remain unhurt, and my sword still thirsts for blood today. Just because *thou* hast exhausted thy magicks, the sun dost not set on *our* explorations. Thou art more than a walking magic wand, my friend, and thy learning and acumen will serve as well as thy enchantments." He'd then toss the mage a dagger and say, with a smile, "The sharp end's the one what goes into the foe."

Perhaps at your table, the fighters are happy to let the casters take a break after a couple combats. Perhaps at your table, the DM is happy to just let everybody sit out for 23 hours and 45 minutes, every day. If everybody's satisfied with that, then there's no problem.

Moreover giving the spellcasters lots of low-powered magic effects will never resolve the issue. Yeah, a 5th-Level sorcerer who can cast burning hands as often as she likes has more options than one who'll need to reach for a light crossbow or a wand.

But if the wizard is whining because she's getting low on spells, she'll still be whining because she's out of useful spells. "We need to stop, my hearty friends. I've cast lightning bolt today, and I must needs rest and recover it before we can go further."

--
Part of the issue is power balance.

In the rounds when a low-level sorcerer and druid cast their spells, they are qualitatively more powerful and versatile than the fighter and rogue. If we allow them to cast spells as often as they please, they'll be outshining the non-spell-users all the time.

When the wizard announces that all his decent spells have been spent and it's time for the party to rest, and the fighter acquiesces, that's the fighter agreeing to be outshone by the wizard every fifteen-minute day.

--
Another factor in the equation is adventure design.

DM's, you want your high-pressure on-the-clock adventures to feel more tense than a typical take-all-the-time-you-need tomb descecration. One tool at your disposal is the spellcasters' need to rest.


Hiya.

NOTE: I do *not* see a problem with how things are now (as far as the whole of 3.5e is concerned). That said...

I haven't read through every post, so someone might have suggested this, but I'd do something simple. I'd give each person casting an *arcane* spell a chance to keep it 'in memory'. Probably use a Spellcraft check with a DC equal to 20 + level of spell (or maybe spell level x2, have to play test to see how often it comes up). So, every time a wizard casts a spell, or a Sorcerer unleashes one, they can make a Spellcraft check to see if they 'retain' it. Seeing as, usually, there are no to-hit rolls needed for spells, I don't think it would increase the dice rolls per session by all that much.

But that's me. :)

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

pming wrote:

Hiya.

I'd give each person casting an *arcane* spell a chance to keep it 'in memory'. Probably use a Spellcraft check with a DC equal to 20 + level of spell (or maybe spell level x2, have to play test to see how often it comes up).

What a nice idea! I'd probably rule that a character trying to 'retain' a spell would need to make a Concentration roll, rather than Spellcraft, and that he wouldn't be able to cast defensively.

I suspect that 20 + 2 x spell level would be about right.


My god people what are some of you talking about.

Magic users are the most powerful class. The problem is that a Wizard need to conserve his power for the entire day. If he blows his load in the first encounter that is his problem.

This was what was always meant to balance them with the weeker classes.

If a party is in my dungean and decide to leave after the first fight they will still have 5 more encounters that same day. The party can't stop time. This is not a computer game you just don't hit the save button. Monsters just don't stand behind the door in suspended animation waiting for some one to open it.

If Pazio go to encounter based ablities, or spell recharging then they will be no different the 4.0 edition. If they are no different then 4.0 then the game will fail.


Lord Welkerfan wrote:

As a player, I never want to have to take out a crossbow and miss over and over again. If I want to conceal my magic, that's fine, but it shouldn't be required. I think that the at-will domain and school powers at first level are a great step. I think that a further step should be made by removing some of the higher level abilities and replacing them with more powerful at-will spells.

The at-will powers don't need to be amazingly powerful; they simply need to be enough to continue to have a meaningful effect once the spells are gone. Yes, when the cleric and wizard are out of spells and the fighter at half hit points, the party should rest, but if the wizard has three nifty tools to use at-will, the party won't have to rest once he's out just so the player can still feel like he's having an effect.

It this case then all ablities would have to be at will or the party will still rest once the big ablities are used.

So to make your solution work all spells should get far weeker and at will. then the wizard will be balance with the other clases.

example

wizard learnd fireball. Wizard can cast fireball at will. Therefor fireball only does 1d6/5 level max 4d6 at 20th.


orcdoubleax wrote:

My god people what are some of you talking about.

Magic users are the most powerful class. The problem is that a Wizard need to conserve his power for the entire day. If he blows his load in the first encounter that is his problem.

This was what was always meant to balance them with the weeker classes.

If a party is in my dungean and decide to leave after the first fight they will still have 5 more encounters that same day. The party can't stop time. This is not a computer game you just don't hit the save button. Monsters just don't stand behind the door in suspended animation waiting for some one to open it.

If Pazio go to encounter based ablities, or spell recharging then they will be no different the 4.0 edition. If they are no different then 4.0 then the game will fail.

I disagree, the main problem is you assume is this is the way forth edition operates.

It doesn’t.

I forth addition everyone gets per day powers. Which means everyone has to rest for 6 hours to regain their valuable per day powers. Which means in order for an adventuring group to fight at full efficiency they must rest 6 hours.

In other words everyone fires and forgets, even fighter, never mind that that’s just not sensible. So I see no problem with allowing spell casters a quicker way to recover powers, no problem with it at all.

Grand Lodge

I believe the spell-casting aspect of this is adequately covered with the free 0-level spells and school/domain powers, but want to play-test before making a final judgement. Of course, that will be hard until Alpha 2 and 3 come out, and we have all of the classes.

What my reading tells me is that we could still use more healing. My brother and I came up with a few possible tweaks.

1/ Put Cure Minor Wounds back in. Yes, it will give unlimited healing, but at 10hp per minute of casting, it leaves a lot of time to be interrupted, and becomes almost meaningless at higher levels.

2/ Come up with a similar Orison. Ex. Cure Wounds, casting time 1 minute, allows caster to roll a Heal check DC 10, heals the amount by which you beat the DC (Heal domain gets +1 on this check). This also buffs up the Heal skill, and still takes a lot of time, and scales with increase in level.

3/ Use a "Bind Wounds" mechanic. A Heal check that Anyone can make to heal a limited amount of damage (eg. 1 minute to do, DC15 Heal check, heals amount you beat check by). Reduces reliance on Clerics, still takes time, scales, and makes Heal skill more useful.

The Exchange

One thing that would help would be to allow the "at will" spells to scale with your level. Perhaps every 5 or so levels the "at will" spells could bump one level. 5th level casters can choose 4 1st level spells to cast at will, at 10th level it bumps to 2nd, at 15th it bumps to 3rd, at 20th it goes to 4th. I would prohibit the use of meta-magic feats on them as well.

Scarab Sages

Fedifensor wrote:


Seems to me that you're advocating an approach that forces character choices and play style to be restricted by the way the rules are written, instead of writing rules that allow people to play the way they want.

not at all. I am stating that the rules, as written encourage careful husbanding of resources and intelligent and creative strategies to overcome obstacles. The rules, when abused, lead to the 15 minute day.

Fedifensor wrote:


The rules currently encourage the type of play that you say is an abuse of the spirit of the rules.

No, powergaming encourages this behavior. Most equal CR encounters can be overcome with most of a parties per day abilities exhausted simply by using one shot magic items & non-magical items like alchemy.

Fedisfensor wrote:


Here's an analogy - do you tell a gunfighter that although he's got six bullets in his gun, he can only use one because there are more challengers waiting?

I think your analogy is flawed, but I'll run with it since you introduced it. Ok, a gunslinger has 6 bullets. He can use all 6 to take out one opponent. but can he tell the rest of the posse hunting him to wait 12 hours while he takes a nap and reloads his gun? No. if he is foolish enough to empty his gun against his 1st opponent of the day, he still has to deal with the balance of the encounters.

"" wrote:


In a life or death situation, I don't begrudge a wizard the decision to use most of his high-level spells, then finding a secure place to rest in order to reload.

But here lies the problem. You as a DM have created a static world where monsters simply "take a coffee break" until their door is kicked in. In any kind of dynamic setting, the adversaries should react to the parties attack. An abortive day should do nothing more than warn the enemy & perhaps call a counterstrike on the party. This isn't an attempt to constrain play style, it's just common sense. Try to think of any fantasy movie or novel. Could the fellowship tell the goblins of moria to stop attacking because they needed to camp after the battle in Balin's tomb? Of course not, that would be ridiculous. They had to fight their way out to safety, and even then had to flee beyond the range of a counterstrike before resting. A D&D game is about these types of decisions and struggles. If adventuring was easy we wouldn't call characters heroes.

Scarab Sages

crosswiredmind wrote:
One thing that would help would be to allow the "at will" spells to scale with your level. Perhaps every 5 or so levels the "at will" spells could bump one level. 5th level casters can choose 4 1st level spells to cast at will, at 10th level it bumps to 2nd, at 15th it bumps to 3rd, at 20th it goes to 4th. I would prohibit the use of meta-magic feats on them as well.

Sorry for the double post.

I just saw this and wanted to say that this could be a very elegant and workable solution. My only suggestion would be that i would tie the progression to a feat so it was not free. Having 3rd or 4th level spells at will would become too powerful IMO even at 15th+ level. If, however a feat like Spell mastery were required to add a new level I think this could work.


I'm of the opinion that there is no problem to be fixed. If a wizard runs out of spells and has to resort to the crossbow, that's not the game system's fault. It's the wizard's fault for not conserving his spells or spending time to obtain scrolls or wands.

Seriously, if you're playing a wizard and keep running out of spells, either find a way to budget your spell use or play another class.


jdh417 wrote:

This might make better sense than my first post.

Wizards spell recovery
Class Levels 0-5
Recover 1 spell (level 0-3) with 1 hour of rest with DC 15 Spellcraft check

Class Levels 6-10
Recover 2 spells (level 0-3) with 1 hour of rest with DC 15 Spellcraft check

Class Levels 11-15
Recover 2 spells (level 0-3) with 1 hour of rest with DC 15 Spellcraft check
Or
Recover 1 spell (level 4-6) with 1 hour of rest with DC 20 Spellcraft check

Class Levels 16-20
Recover 4 spells (level 0-3) with 1 hour of rest with DC 15 Spellcraft check
Or
Recover 2 spells (level 4-6) with 1 hour of rest with DC 20 Spellcraft check

I think something like this could be adapted for HP recovery as well.

I was going to do something similar to this, except using spell points instead of spell level slots. Using the spell point system from UA as the base, the idea was to allow the casters to gain spell points equal to their ability mod + 1/2 their caster level per hour (back up to maximum).

Admittedly, it is a bit video gamey, and I haven't had a chance to actually play test it yet. But it's a step in addressing the issue.

HP's are another thing... I'm not a fan of having hit points recharge like this. (Yet strangely I have no problem with magic). The hit point issue can be addressed by casting cure spells, but that limits the cleric (and other classes with access to those spells) rather unfairly after a tough fight. And the party still stops waiting for the cleric to recharge their spell points for several hours to heal up.

Liberty's Edge

The various reserve feats (Complete Arcane or COmplete Mage?) seem to solve this problem...which was hardly really ever a problem...in my D&D groups.

Some mechanic similar to this I suggest...but not overhauling the 3.5 core spellcasting system, no thanks there!

-DM Jeff


Chris Mortika wrote:
pming wrote:

Hiya.

I'd give each person casting an *arcane* spell a chance to keep it 'in memory'. Probably use a Spellcraft check with a DC equal to 20 + level of spell (or maybe spell level x2, have to play test to see how often it comes up).

What a nice idea! I'd probably rule that a character trying to 'retain' a spell would need to make a Concentration roll, rather than Spellcraft, and that he wouldn't be able to cast defensively.

I suspect that 20 + 2 x spell level would be about right.

This mechanic only seems about right.

A 1st level caster with max ranks and a modifier of say +4 (which is actually high) would have a skill bonus of +8. A first level spell would have a DC of 22, so the caster would need a 14 (35% chance). This would increase the casters spell allotment by about one third. This seems okay.

However, a 20th level caster with max ranks and say a modifier of +6 (which is kind of low for a 20th level) would have a bonus of +29. The DC for a ninth level spell would be 38, so the caster would need a 9 (55% chance). This would increase his spell allotment by a little over half. He would automatically recover any spell fourth level or lower making them at-will.

A 10th level caster with max ranks and a modifier of +4 would have a bonus of +17. He would need a 5 (75% chance) to recover a first level spell or a 9 (55% chance) to recover a third level spell or a 13 (40% chance) to recover a fifth level spell.


Scribbling Rambler wrote:

I believe the spell-casting aspect of this is adequately covered with the free 0-level spells and school/domain powers, but want to play-test before making a final judgement. Of course, that will be hard until Alpha 2 and 3 come out, and we have all of the classes.

What my reading tells me is that we could still use more healing. My brother and I came up with a few possible tweaks.

1/ Put Cure Minor Wounds back in. Yes, it will give unlimited healing, but at 10hp per minute of casting, it leaves a lot of time to be interrupted, and becomes almost meaningless at higher levels.

2/ Come up with a similar Orison. Ex. Cure Wounds, casting time 1 minute, allows caster to roll a Heal check DC 10, heals the amount by which you beat the DC (Heal domain gets +1 on this check). This also buffs up the Heal skill, and still takes a lot of time, and scales with increase in level.

3/ Use a "Bind Wounds" mechanic. A Heal check that Anyone can make to heal a limited amount of damage (eg. 1 minute to do, DC15 Heal check, heals amount you beat check by). Reduces reliance on Clerics, still takes time, scales, and makes Heal skill more useful.

OOPS SOMEHOW QUOTED THE WRONG POST

MEANT TO QUOTE ISMELLMONKEY

It not really the point of how fourth edition works. I don't really know much about fourth edition.

The point is there is a market opportunity of people that were happy with 3.5 and don't want a drastically different game. So if Pazio makes a game with only minor changes they can capitlaize on this. If they make something that is drastically different they will miss the market completely.

I am not a game designer, but I do have a Marketing degree. It is a pretty basic concept that you don't make a lot of change if your going to try to market to the people that were not for change.

The Exchange

underling wrote:
crosswiredmind wrote:
One thing that would help would be to allow the "at will" spells to scale with your level. Perhaps every 5 or so levels the "at will" spells could bump one level. 5th level casters can choose 4 1st level spells to cast at will, at 10th level it bumps to 2nd, at 15th it bumps to 3rd, at 20th it goes to 4th. I would prohibit the use of meta-magic feats on them as well.

Sorry for the double post.

I just saw this and wanted to say that this could be a very elegant and workable solution. My only suggestion would be that i would tie the progression to a feat so it was not free. Having 3rd or 4th level spells at will would become too powerful IMO even at 15th+ level. If, however a feat like Spell mastery were required to add a new level I think this could work.

A feat could work - or make it a bump at only levels 8 and 16.


I'm not going to say that this isn't a problem from time to time, but honestly, I get the feeling that this was something that most people accepted as just part of the D&D style of play "If we go in guns blazing, we'll be finished in 15 minutes, if we play smart, we have hours to check this place out."

I'm not saying that its not valid, but I think somewhere along the line, some of the WOTC designers decided that they didn't like the "15 minute day," and started beating the drum, especially on the podcasts even pre 4e announcement, and started pushing the issue with reserve feats and classes like the Warlock.

Thus, what was at one time an annoying, but ultimately not major, issue with the game and its standard tropes, became a "problem" that needs a "fix."

There may be some truth to needed the spellcasters to have something "spellcastery" to do for longer in the day, just to make them feel like they aren't holding the party back, but I don't think it warrants a total remake of how the game has worked for the last 30 years or so.

Grand Lodge

papakee wrote:
I played a elf wizard in a 2nd level 3.0 game last night..and guess what? I didn't cast a single spell. We went through several rooms of goblins. I threw caltrops, daggers and attacked with my rapier.. I searched for stuff, explored, gathered up javelins, poked dead goblins eyes out and avoided traps...I had fun!!!!

sorry but to me that is not a wizard at all, thats an elf. all you did was use your high dex and racial weapons to overcome the lack of spells.


KnightErrantJR wrote:
I'm not going to say that this isn't a problem from time to time, but honestly, I get the feeling that this was something that most people accepted as just part of the D&D style of play "If we go in guns blazing, we'll be finished in 15 minutes, if we play smart, we have hours to check this place out."

Correct. I think there are some mechanical changes that can be made to mitigate the worst aspects of the so-called 15-minute adventuring day, but, by and large, this is just the style of play D&D evokes and that its rules have always supported. To "fix" it would require both a significant overhaul of many core mechanics and a change in the play style it evokes.

I don't think there's necessarily anything wrong with alternate approaches, although I don't find them especially interesting. However, Pathfinder is, among other things, about preserving a gaming space for certain types of stories, namely the stories the D&D mechanics evoke, including the cautious, "play smart" spellcaster who doesn't blow his full allotment of spells on the first encounter.

Again, some of the worst excesses of this style can be blunted somewhat through judicious rules tweaks, but nothing short of a major rules overhaul will eliminate it entirely and that's not what Pathfinder is about.

Grand Lodge

Perhaps reworking the spell system isn't the best way to go with compatibility issues, as i mentioned in another thread I really liked the idea that wizards in 4e seemed to be getting what I would call mage weapons, that being staffs, wands, tomes, and orbs.

Using these tools to provide reusable magical energy instead of feats would help reduce the dependency on an already limited resource. The bonded item in alpha 1 is a nice step in the right direction but i think it could be taken further.

If it works it could open up a whole new range of features, like adding martial weapons to possible bonded items at first level of Eldrich Knight PrC, granting them an ability akin to arcane strike or channel spell. could also make an awesome Bladesinger too.

Anyhow, I'm not sure what the best way would be to approach such a change, my feeling is it would have to incorporate both a magic item change as well as a fundamental change to a wizards progression plus item creation feats. but having said that I think it would still be a more viable option for backwards compatibility than changing the entire spell system.

Oh and please no Spell Points, more book-keeping similar to hit points is one of the reasons my players won't consider psionics (even though I personally love them).


With wizards still running out of magic so soon I began thinking of ways to fix this. What I finally came up with is something that I tend to do lots of in the higher levels, Improvise. My wizards usually have a wand for most things and scrolls for those he does not have. The problem at low levels is that the fuel is used up rather quickly and then a brake is needed or they begin using mundane weapons. I've never found this applicable to fantasy. It honestly feels like they put a cop to go after a gang and only gave him a baton and handcuffs. So what I began doing is allowing a wand at first level and maybe a few scrolls. It helps tremendously and we treat the wand as a graduation of sorts from there academy and it is included as well as a spellbook in there starting inventory. Gives them a bit more of a fighting chance at lower levels and adds a little something to character creation.


Well, I've played a variety of wizards and sorcerers from 1st to 28th level in 3.5. The 15-minute day has always been an option for my groups, but one we've rarely used. Once in a while, sure, especially at high level, but it's not something that's common.

Why? Because it's a role-playing game. Think about it - you spend an hour doing exciting, dangerous things then stop, and sit and do nothing for twenty-three hours? I dunno about you, but sitting around for 23 hours would drive me nuts. Your characters aren't hitting the Rest button and then nearly-instantly continuing, they're staring at the inside of a Rope Trick or at the barricaded door of a room for 23 hours.

As many others have said, the Vancian system needs to stay. If for no other reason, than for backwards compatibility. If it's something that bothers you, as a DM, then there's already many house-rule options out there.


Just an odd thought about this topic i have not really thought much about it yet and will just throw it out onto the floor.

Firstly there are a few in the core rules mechanics for regaining spells such as pearls of power and the rod of absorption so making such items more available would seem to be the easy fix.

Secondly a variant of counter spelling could be done that enabled the countered spell's energy to be absorbed and reused.

As i said at the start how i would do the second option i don't know yet just wanted to get this down before i forget it again

Grand Lodge

on page 1 of this thread Geron raveneye makes some good points but the system doesn't help the situation. Dungeon crawls are the bread and butter of D&D since 1st edition. You remember running round town as a 15th level fighter looking for a rat to kill because you only needed 1 xp to go up, thats the mentality of the game not just the people who play it.

The other problem is that the system limits other solutions to the point where its easier to pick up a sword and hit the damn thing. XP for kills and treasure was all they could come up with. Third edition did a better job of providing "roleplaying" experience but the fact is its still far more difficult to adjudicate than just hitting someone with a sword.

In the end changing your players mindset (and the DMs to a large degree) is far more difficult than giving every class a way to deal damage every round.

What it boils down to is that balance is all about combat because people rarely complain that rogues are better at skills than everyone else. If you feel any different then perhaps D&D is not the game for you. While 4e has ruled out role-playing almost entirely in favor of tabletop play there are plenty of systems out there that do the reverse. I however, think that Paizo have the opportunity before them to present a modified ruleset that acts as a happy medium for both sides of the fence.

51 to 100 of 151 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Roleplaying Game / Alpha Playtest Feedback / Alpha Release 1 / General Discussion / The Fifteen Minute Adventuring Day... All Messageboards