What my group now does is:
Upon a wizard's creation that wizard has access to their specialized school as well as the divination school. If that wizard is a generalist, then he has access to two schools of his choice along with divination. Every 3 levels a wizard opens up access to lower level spells of a new school.
1 - 2 schools, 3 if generalist
3 - New school of up to highest spell level available -1
6 - New school of up to highest spell level available -2
9 - New school of up to highest spell level available -3
12 - New school of up to highest spell level available -4
15 - New school of up to highest spell level available -5
Origionally it was every 4 level but we found it to be too restrictive. Granted these are our rules for 3.5, but they can be translated into PF easily enough. Also, we used the spell point system to memorize spells from Unearthed Arcana. This has worked well to balance wizards by narrowing their focus.
Spontaneous casters in our games have spell recharage times, as per Unearthed Arcana. But sorcerers my choose to cast as divine casters and learn from the cleric list or driud list instead of the wizard list.
Clerics have access only to a small amount of spells available to all clerics, things such as cure and inflict, spiritual weapon, align weapon, and so on. It is a drastically shortened list. However, clerics may prepare any spell from any domain their deity offers, though he still chooses 2 domains to focus in for granted powers.
My games also involve rules for broken limbs which casters generally become more suceptable to and suffer some serious penalties.
I really like your suggestion for flavor purposes. You could do that really well for a dragon lance / towers of high sorcery style game.
I'm not sure it addresses my real problem: the wizard spamming save or suck spells, effectively banning enemies that have the wrong weak save.
The best advice I can give for a SoS spamming wizard is to have a copy of each player's character and look through them carefully to accurately guage their strengths and weaknesses. Then it is all down to encounter design. Use several enemies of various types. Not so many that they are all weak and will fall to area SoS, but not so few as to one or two spells will end the battle. If you have a mixed group of enemies, set up somewhat like an adventuring party, say a divine caster, an arcane caster, a martial type, etc, all with their own strengths and weaknesses. This will allow the SoS wizard to be effective by taking out enemies one at a time, but at the expense of multiple spells, which he will have to weigh whether or not it will be worth burning so many in a fight or saving them for later encounters. Multiple encounters in a day are good.
|
The guy can still just win initiative and cast sleep all over everyone.
Actually Sleep has a 1 round casting time so even if they win initiative everything would still get an entire turn before the wizard would finish casting the spell. Plenty of time to just hit him with a rock/bolt/arrow/thunderstone/etc and interrupt the spell casting or for them to move into melee with the other adventurers and limit the spell's usefulness considerably.
|
I'm looking for suggestions for rules I can add that weaken casters significantly.
My knee jerk reaction is to not allow concentration rolls - any time they take damage before their turn causes them to lose their spell.
Unfortunately, that doesn't really solve the problem. The guy can still just win initiative and cast sleep all over everyone.
What I don't want to do is superficially fix the problem by having nothing but encounters where everything has SR, nor do I want to always be nuking the wizard with hidden archers at the start of every fight. What I would like, in an ideal world, is for them to be able to be there without making or breaking the fight.
One idea is to make saving throws level dependent - give everyone good saves in all categories. Its always struck me as silly that a fighter has the willpower to become such a great warrior, but he crumples as soon as someone fidgets with his head.
Ideas?
First, check the spells and make sure you are including all of the limitations of the spells.
For example Sleep is a 10 ft burst, so unless all the bad guys are bunched side by side it's a single target effect at medium range to a max of 4 HD worth of creatures, if they don't make the save. And they wake up as soon as they are hit in any way. And it's medium range, so you can be spotted before you can cast depending on circumstances and with a full round cast have the spell interrupted.
What spells are you having trouble with in what circumstances.
|
|
Sleep was the biggest offender, but I think I was channeling my 2e days or something. Every once in a while I still reach for the 2d4.I'm looking for suggestions for rules I can add that weaken casters significantly.
My knee jerk reaction is to not allow concentration rolls - any time they take damage before their turn causes them to lose their spell.
Unfortunately, that doesn't really solve the problem. The guy can still just win initiative and cast sleep all over everyone.
What I don't want to do is superficially fix the problem by having nothing but encounters where everything has SR, nor do I want to always be nuking the wizard with hidden archers at the start of every fight. What I would like, in an ideal world, is for them to be able to be there without making or breaking the fight.
One idea is to make saving throws level dependent - give everyone good saves in all categories. Its always struck me as silly that a fighter has the willpower to become such a great warrior, but he crumples as soon as someone fidgets with his head.
Ideas?
First, check the spells and make sure you are including all of the limitations of the spells.
For example Sleep is a 10 ft burst, so unless all the bad guys are bunched side by side it's a single target effect at medium range to a max of 4 HD worth of creatures, if they don't make the save. And they wake up as soon as they are hit in any way. And it's medium range, so you can be spotted before you can cast depending on circumstances.
What spells are you having trouble with in what circumstances.
Happens all the time, particularly for people who go way back. At least once a session the DM is doing a spell correction when they check the book, as they did a lot of subtle nerfing.
Half of the "Casters Rule" threads need to be "Casters need to read the Rules" threads :)
Half of the "Casters Rule" threads need to be "Casters need to read the Rules" threads :)
This. 9 times out of 10, the problem isn't about how it works, but about how people think it works.
To be fair, all spells have change a little bit at every iteration of the game, so its hard to keep track of everything unless you've been introduced late in the hobby (i.e. since 3.5).
My suggestion would be to go though the spell list and ban the spells you don't want to see. I understand that your games are houserule heavy, but it's good (if not essential) to have a written copy of the rules for reference. Its a matter of respect and fairness to everyone. Short of re-writing every spell to your convenience, simply list the ones that cause you headache with red ink. In bold. That may leave a game with no sleep spell. Oh well, move-on and learn another spell instead.
Short, universal rules are also good, such as your suggested "no concentration roll allowed" rule. Its simple, applicable to every spell without a re-write and especially, the players know what to expect.
Should you find yourself banning 90% of the spells, then you may have a problem with the spell system as a whole. At that point I would suggest to look into another spell system to import, or to create.
'findel
Sleep affects a maximum of 4HD, and there is no guarantee. Not so powerful past 1st level. An equivalent fighter can kill opponents (like a 2 HD gnoll) almost as fast, and do it all day.
Be careful about class balance, if anything I usually buff low level casters with buffed at-will powers.
And btw, concentration isn't a factor in my games. The concentration rules are already severe, fact is opponents rarely get to attack the casters.
If your going to just going to screw casters with rather dumb hoserules, why not just remove them all from the game at that point.
I mean really do you honestly think a caster always has the correct spell prepared, always hits the maximum amount of people in the area effect, always has their spell succeded, always outshine other characters, and always has the appropriate buff to stop all attacks.
The simple answer is no.
What's the differance between a caster who disables a creature with one limited use spell or the non-caster who can cut down said same creature in a single attack action.
Nothing.
Most just think they are so powerful and look at the maxiumum effect possible from a spell. But in the same spectrum, looking at what a non-caster can do at maximum effect is just as much.
*Disclaimer(This is not meant to offend anyone, but if your still offended then i don't care.)
I think there is good evidence that full casters are the most powerful classes in the game. That's been hashed out over and over again by smarter people than me. There solutions are WAY more ham handed than mine.If your going to just going to screw casters with rather dumb hoserules, why not just remove them all from the game at that point.
I mean really do you honestly think a caster always has the correct spell prepared, always hits the maximum amount of people in the area effect, always has their spell succeded, always outshine other characters, and always has the appropriate buff to stop all attacks.
The simple answer is no.
What's the differance between a caster who disables a creature with one limited use spell or the non-caster who can cut down said same creature in a single attack action.
Nothing.
Most just think they are so powerful and look at the maxiumum effect possible from a spell. But in the same spectrum, looking at what a non-caster can do at maximum effect is just as much.
*Disclaimer(This is not meant to offend anyone, but if your still offended then i don't care.)
There's a lot of campaign design, GM style, and player style that goes into demonstrating that casters are more powerful. In the games I run, they aren't more powerful. I don't use any house rules. I do use things like wandering monsters, enforcement of costs, and double checking the spells. Casters have a ton of potential to be incredibly powerful if the GM just lets them run amok. If the GM is paying attention, their power is brought way into line. They are still powerful but nowhere near as powerful as some people think.
I think there is good evidence that full casters are the most powerful classes in the game. That's been hashed out over and over again by smarter people than me. There solutions are WAY more ham handed than mine.
Where is this evidence... I know in 3.5 they could be a bit... too much, at the higher levels, but that's not been my experience in Pathfinder. Where are you seeing people show evidence that Wizards are too powerful?
Where is this evidence... I know in 3.5 they could be a bit... too much, at the higher levels, but that's not been my experience in Pathfinder. Where are you seeing people show evidence that Wizards are too powerful?
I think there is good evidence that full casters are the most powerful classes in the game. That's been hashed out over and over again by smarter people than me. There solutions are WAY more ham handed than mine.
A bunch of threads all over the boards, search and ye shall find.
A bunch of threads all over the boards, search and ye shall find.Where is this evidence... I know in 3.5 they could be a bit... too much, at the higher levels, but that's not been my experience in Pathfinder. Where are you seeing people show evidence that Wizards are too powerful?
I think there is good evidence that full casters are the most powerful classes in the game. That's been hashed out over and over again by smarter people than me. There solutions are WAY more ham handed than mine.
Read the threads, still looking for the evidence. I have read that the Divination Specialization is the most important if you want to specialize, that the Universalist is the best after 8th level because of the free metamagic (thoughyou'd have to be 14th level to Quicken a spell, or 18th level to do it twice in a day), that Summoning spells are the best choices (despite Druids doing it better, but they're not too powerful), but I haven't seen any mechanic evidence. Where's the evidence?
Read the threads, still looking for the evidence. I have read that the Divination Specialization is the most important if you want to specialize, that the Universalist is the best after 8th level because of the free metamagic (thoughyou'd have to be 14th level to Quicken a spell, or 18th level to do it twice in a day), that Summoning spells are the best choices (despite Druids doing it better, but they're not too powerful), but I haven't seen any mechanic evidence. Where's the evidence?A bunch of threads all over the boards, search and ye shall find.Where is this evidence... I know in 3.5 they could be a bit... too much, at the higher levels, but that's not been my experience in Pathfinder. Where are you seeing people show evidence that Wizards are too powerful?
I think there is good evidence that full casters are the most powerful classes in the game. That's been hashed out over and over again by smarter people than me. There solutions are WAY more ham handed than mine.
You need to read a thread where people compare them to fighters. There are dozens of them around. Searching the 3.5 boards also helps, assuming the threads survived the forum reboot. Some did, and some didn't.
Read this
and this
and this
and more stuff on tiers
You need to read a thread where people compare them to fighters. There are dozens of them around. Searching the 3.5 boards also helps, assuming the threads survived the forum reboot. Some did, and some didn't.Read this
and this
and this
and more stuff on tiers
Good reading, but unless I'm misunderstanding the meaning of "weakening" for the Wizard. Tiers are about versatility. Able to do more than swing a sword. That's balanced against the fact that nobody can compare to a Fighter with a weapon. So, the weakening for versatility has been handled by low offense, low AC, etc.
Wizards are extremely versatile, and not useless in combat for it. Fighters are not useless outside of combat, and extremely great in combat.
Not to mention... One of those threads suggested that Tiers could be calculated by putting a dragon atop an icy mountain as a goal. Who can get up the mountain, past the dragon, get the treasure, etc, etc... In my experience, the Tier 1 fighter would do it just as easily as the Wizard. Fighters can get the right magic items, the right equipment, the right skills, to do all those things. And if the Dragon does go to combat for both, the Fighter has the better chance of defeating and surviving the encounter.
I can surely agree that Wizards are more versatile. What I'm having a hard time understanding is how they're a better class than a Fighter (or any other Canon Core Class). I'm not talking 3.5 (never even played 3.5), I'm talking Pathfinder.
You need to read a thread where people compare them to fighters. There are dozens of them around. Searching the 3.5 boards also helps, assuming the threads survived the forum reboot. Some did, and some didn't.Read this
and this
and this
and more stuff on tiersGood reading, but unless I'm misunderstanding the meaning of "weakening" for the Wizard. Tiers are about versatility. Able to do more than swing a sword. That's balanced against the fact that nobody can compare to a Fighter with a weapon. So, the weakening for versatility has been handled by low offense, low AC, etc.
Wizards are extremely versatile, and not useless in combat for it. Fighters are not useless outside of combat, and extremely great in combat.
Not to mention... One of those threads suggested that Tiers could be calculated by putting a dragon atop an icy mountain as a goal. Who can get up the mountain, past the dragon, get the treasure, etc, etc... In my experience, the Tier 1 fighter would do it just as easily as the Wizard. Fighters can get the right magic items, the right equipment, the right skills, to do all those things. And if the Dragon does go to combat for both, the Fighter has the better chance of defeating and surviving the encounter.
I can surely agree that Wizards are more versatile. What I'm having a hard time understanding is how they're a better class than a Fighter (or any other...
The wizard can buff the other classes to high heavens (Enlarge Person (with mass at later levels), Haste, Heroism, Blur, greater invisibility, Globe of invulnerability), weaken the enemy to laughable strength (Ray of enfeeblement, Slow, Ray of Exhaustion, waves of fatigue, touch of idiocy, enervation), alter the world around them to take away whatever advantages the enemy had left (Wall of X, Polymorph any object, black tentacles, cloud kill), and sit back and laugh maniacally (Ahh hahahahaha).
You need to read a thread where people compare them to fighters. There are dozens of them around. Searching the 3.5 boards also helps, assuming the threads survived the forum reboot. Some did, and some didn't.Read this
and this
and this
and more stuff on tiersGood reading, but unless I'm misunderstanding the meaning of "weakening" for the Wizard. Tiers are about versatility. Able to do more than swing a sword. That's balanced against the fact that nobody can compare to a Fighter with a weapon. So, the weakening for versatility has been handled by low offense, low AC, etc.
Wizards are extremely versatile, and not useless in combat for it. Fighters are not useless outside of combat, and extremely great in combat.
Not to mention... One of those threads suggested that Tiers could be calculated by putting a dragon atop an icy mountain as a goal. Who can get up the mountain, past the dragon, get the treasure, etc, etc... In my experience, the Tier 1 fighter would do it just as easily as the Wizard. Fighters can get the right magic items, the right equipment, the right skills, to do all those things. And if the Dragon does go to combat for both, the Fighter has the better chance of defeating and surviving the encounter.
I can surely agree that Wizards are more versatile. What I'm having a hard time understanding is how they're a better class than a Fighter (or any other...
Unlike the druid and cleric the wizard has not been affected much so his power level is about the same. I don't think all classes to need to be equal as long as everyone has something to do that keeps them useful. A wizard(also cleric and druid in some cases) if it focused on another classes area could do sufficiently well in that class's role, even if they are not doing it as well as the original class. That is the issue many people have with them. Most of the complaints are theory based, even though I think they could happen, but in an actual game they don't come up. Most people are conscious enough of other people to avoid overshadowing them. Being able to do so many different things does make a class very powerful.
As for the fighter comment getting the right equipment that depends on the DM. Many do not run magic mart, but the wizard/other caster only needs to cast a spell to get the same affect. Fighters are also not good at skills. A dragon has an easier time with a fighter than a caster. There are quiet a few spells with no save or SR, and even if the spell requires both a well built caster can greatly increase the chances of bypassing both. You can run 4 full casters(I don't just mean wizards) through an AP. I doubt four fighters will make it without DM fudging.
New month, new "Fighters v. Wizards thread"...
<In little kid voice> He started it. :)
edit:Mr.G also just proved my point. There are tons of these threads, and my last post came from the tier threads.
I guess that the best Wizard nerf possible is actually sitting down and reading spells and magic rules.
Because if somebody kicks off by not being aware how sleep works, well, that's not exactly the best start.
'
I had a sorcerer abusing that spell until the game came to a premature halt, and then I found out. I think people, and I am guilty of this sometimes skim read especially when they think they know the rules.
|
I guess that the best Wizard nerf possible is actually sitting down and reading spells and magic rules.
Because if somebody kicks off by not being aware how sleep works, well, that's not exactly the best start.
'
I had a sorcerer abusing that spell until the game came to a premature halt, and then I found out. I think people, and I am guilty of this sometimes skim read especially when they think they know the rules.
Yeah, I did that totally with several spells in the past. But I'm not having any ambitions of rebalancing classes :)
The wizard can buff the other classes to high heavens (Enlarge Person (with mass at later levels), Haste, Heroism, Blur, greater invisibility, Globe of invulnerability), weaken the enemy to laughable strength (Ray of enfeeblement, Slow, Ray of Exhaustion, waves of fatigue, touch of idiocy, enervation), alter the world around them to take away whatever advantages the enemy had left (Wall of X, Polymorph any object, black tentacles, cloud kill), and sit back and laugh maniacally (Ahh hahahahaha).
How easy is it for you to get the perfect list of spells in your spellbook? Our GM pretty much never leaves scrolls or books lying around to be transcribed from... Admittedly, 2 spells of choice per class level does indeed help, but the number of castings per day make many of those spells 1-trick ponies (assuming you memorized all those spells, and not multiple versions of the same spell, which decreases that versatility).
Now, I fully admit, I'm speaking as someone who's still relatively new to the game. I'm going to GM my very first game this coming weekend, so my goal here is not to scoff at the idea that Wizards are overpowered. I'm trying to find out how so, and in a manner where it's thought out, not just read, and assumed as truth because someone posted it.
If a Wizard is truly overpowered, I just need to know. But I've perused these boards for days now, and not seen any evidence (short of that list posted by Kierato in this reply); and I like that none of the spells you listed were Summons, that's good to know too.
And what about the 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th encounter of the day? In my experience, the Wizard can shine in combat, greater than the fighter, but generally, that's only against the Big Boss whom he's saved his spells for, or once you find out a battle isn't going your way, using those higher level spells early on to help in either a tactical withdrawal, or quick domination. Heck, I see Wizards go through multiple combats without casting a spell (admittedly, only at the lower levels, higher levels, those weaker spells don't work so well, what with the BAB of a Wizard). Conserving their resources for the right time. And of course, there's the BAB... many spells (at least the ones I've seen, in my relatively short time playing PF) have ranged-touch requisites. How's that working at higher levels?
Ie: Throwing a list of spells at me is good, but evidence requires a full list of factors. I'll go through the spells listed tonight to see how easy they are to cast, their levels, and if BAB is a factor, so maybe that list is reason enough... just trying to find out.
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
How easy is it for you to get the perfect list of spells in your spellbook?
This is one of the better ways to limit wizards, make them pay/research their spells.
And what about the 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th encounter of the day?
Most groups I have played in only have 2-3 combat encounters a day and don't fully make the wizard conserve.
I don't see wizards as even being remotely overpowered. They have limits to their uses a day unlike most combat classes. Make encounters and battles where the wizard has to use spells. Throw encounters at the party that require magic to bypass to make the wizard invest in some non-combat spells. Ensure spells are used properly. Ready actions by NPCs to hit the usually obvious wizard and try to disrupt his spells and waste them.
The wizard can buff the other classes to high heavens (Enlarge Person (with mass at later levels), Haste, Heroism, Blur, greater invisibility, Globe of invulnerability), weaken the enemy to laughable strength (Ray of enfeeblement, Slow, Ray of Exhaustion, waves of fatigue, touch of idiocy, enervation), alter the world around them to take away whatever advantages the enemy had left (Wall of X, Polymorph any object, black tentacles, cloud kill), and sit back and laugh maniacally (Ahh hahahahaha).How easy is it for you to get the perfect list of spells in your spellbook? Our GM pretty much never leaves scrolls or books lying around to be transcribed from... Admittedly, 2 spells of choice per class level does indeed help, but the number of castings per day make many of those spells 1-trick ponies (assuming you memorized all those spells, and not multiple versions of the same spell, which decreases that versatility).
Now, I fully admit, I'm speaking as someone who's still relatively new to the game. I'm going to GM my very first game this coming weekend, so my goal here is not to scoff at the idea that Wizards are overpowered. I'm trying to find out how so, and in a manner where it's thought out, not just read, and assumed as truth because someone posted it.
If a Wizard is truly overpowered, I just need to know. But I've perused these boards for days now, and not seen any evidence (short of that list posted by Kierato in this reply); and I like that none of the spells you listed were Summons, that's good to know too.
And what about the 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th encounter of the day? In my experience, the Wizard can shine in combat, greater than the fighter, but generally, that's only against the Big Boss whom he's saved his spells for, or once you find out a battle isn't going your way, using those higher level spells early on to help in either a tactical withdrawal, or quick domination. Heck, I see Wizards go through multiple combats without casting a spell (admittedly, only...
Nothing is inherently OP'd. Some things are harder to deal with than others. Casters at high levels are a pain if you are not used to it. I would suggest not changing anything until you have run a few campaigns, because every change you make will affect something else down the line. As for as choosing the correct spells as a caster(don't just focus on wizards) it gets easier with experience, and many times you don't need a perfect spell for a situation. You just need one that will do, and the better the players are at thinking outside of the box the more spells they will be able to use effectively.
As for getting spells for the spellbook buying scrolls is an option. Even if he does not have magic-mart trading spells with a wizard trading spells for favors is an option.
Most spells don't have a range of touch, and the ones that do are normally not worth the risk. There is also a feat in the APG that increases the range of a spell so if a caster wants to use a touch spell bad enough he will take that feat.
I have also gone through multiple combats without casting a spell. It does not make sense to waste spells.
Maybe you should experiment with disallowing the more general casters in your campaign ?
simply disallow wizards and clerics, it is perfectly fine to just stick to witches and oracles as the only pure casters accesible for mortals.
At the very least it gives you a much less extensive spell list to handle.
|
|
A bunch of threads all over the boards, search and ye shall find.Where is this evidence... I know in 3.5 they could be a bit... too much, at the higher levels, but that's not been my experience in Pathfinder. Where are you seeing people show evidence that Wizards are too powerful?
I think there is good evidence that full casters are the most powerful classes in the game. That's been hashed out over and over again by smarter people than me. There solutions are WAY more ham handed than mine.
Which are invariably full of people who a) say they always have the right spell memorized, b) say they are always able to rest immediately when they run low on good spells, because there are never any deadlines in the game (the princess can wait, I need a nap so I can memorize spells again...) c) don't realize how many spells have been nerfed and in what ways they have been nerfed, d) Always see the bad guy before the bad guy seeks them, e) etc...
Every time someone posts an actual detailed scenario where there was a problem, or posts an "over powered" build, it becomes very clear that they are either house ruling or wrong about rules.
See above about sleep.
simply disallow wizards and clerics, it is perfectly fine to just stick to witches and oracles as the only pure casters accesible for mortals.
made me laugh a bit. The problem seemed to be with the sleeping spell of the wizard. What will happen if there was a sleeping hex from a witch?
Anyway, as has been stated:
Either make your encounters a way that the wizard doesn't own. (more diversity)
Or ask people to play less magic users.
By the way, your wizard seems to be a bit selfish if he spams Save or Suck spells. It would be far better if he tried to play it save and control the battlefield it manners the ennemies can't save against, and his party still has to attack the (weakened) foes. That way he GM never has the feeling of overpowered wizards, and the other players always think that they rule, because they got the killing blow. (but the smart wizards knows better)
simply disallow wizards and clerics, it is perfectly fine to just stick to witches and oracles as the only pure casters accesible for mortals.made me laugh a bit. The problem seemed to be with the sleeping spell of the wizard. What will happen if there was a sleeping hex from a witch?
I did consider that, but that is just one ability that only matters at very low level. What I meant is simply that a more specialized caster is easier to manage, since they have a limited number of abilities. The sleep hex is powerful, but easy to 'fix' if you do not agree, a wizard virtually never runs out off spells to 'fix'.
All spells first level and above may only be used in the creation of magic items (scrolls, potions, rings, etc)
Cantrips/orisons may still be cast freely.
Magic item creation is figured normally except must increase all DC's by 5.
Also, in order to make certain fighter maintains balance, give them SR equal to 10+fighter levels. Oh, and definitely keep them with GOOD save progression for all saves.
I would also consider giving fighters an inherent wisdom bonus for not picking a spellcaster class. (lost immeadiately if they ever learn a spell of anykind) Gnomes would never get this bonus.
Greg
All spells first level and above may only be used in the creation of magic items (scrolls, potions, rings, etc)
Cantrips/orisons may still be cast freely.
Magic item creation is figured normally except must increase all DC's by 5.
Also, in order to make certain fighter maintains balance, give them SR equal to 10+fighter levels. Oh, and definitely keep them with GOOD save progression for all saves.
I would also consider giving fighters an inherent wisdom bonus for not picking a spellcaster class. (lost immeadiately if they ever learn a spell of anykind) Gnomes would never get this bonus.
Greg
Why?
Lots of house rules, but no explanation on why any of those helps balance anything. So... Why?
Why?
Lots of house rules, but no explanation on why any of those helps balance anything. So... Why?
Nope wasn't any explanation as to why. I was mere seeking ways to drasticly reduce the effectiveness of ANY caster. And as a boon improve the fighter, just cuz.
I'm looking for suggestions for rules I can add that weaken casters significantly.
As to the fighter SR, I see now that is poorly thought out, since OP did not want to randomly increase SR.
Greg
I'm looking for suggestions for rules I can add that weaken casters significantly.
Ideas?
It sounds like it is the Save Or Die spells that are viewed as the problem in your game, so I'm going to limit my suggestion to that.
All spells that have a duration longer than 1 round allow a second saving throw as a full round action if the first is failed. This full round action must be made at the next action of the affected character or else the second save is auto failed.
This simulates the spell taking an extra round to establish full effect. The first save would mean the magic simply bounced initially. The second save would mean full concentrated effort was able to resist the magic.
Actually, as a nonsnarky reply, merely using a best of two rolls on saves for all spells allowing saving throws would drastically reduce the power of casters.
Making all ranged spells CLOSE would hurt alot too.
Greg
Increase the number of encounters in the game by a variable per day of 1-2.
Never always 1, or 2, or 0. Change it up.
Keep the game unpredictable- just like the lives your PC's are supposed to be living.
Make there be someone in the room past the BBEG. Make something attack them as they sleep.
Keep them guessing and the supposed super power of the wizard is reduced drastically. The wizard wins when he learns your pattern (or lack thereof) and can plan accordingly.
I'm not talking about targeting his weakness or archers blowing him to bits- just keep the game slightly random so he (and everyone else) is abit on the edge of their seat about whats going to happen.
They'll have more fun, you'll have more fun, and they'll never even know you "nerfed the wizard".
-S
I removed an offensive post.
How easy is it for you to get the perfect list of spells in your spellbook?This is one of the better ways to limit wizards, make them pay/research their spells.
And what about the 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th encounter of the day?Most groups I have played in only have 2-3 combat encounters a day and don't fully make the wizard conserve.
I don't see wizards as even being remotely overpowered. They have limits to their uses a day unlike most combat classes. Make encounters and battles where the wizard has to use spells. Throw encounters at the party that require magic to bypass to make the wizard invest in some non-combat spells. Ensure spells are used properly. Ready actions by NPCs to hit the usually obvious wizard and try to disrupt his spells and waste them.
Sounds like your game is alot like mine, Thomas. I keep having to remind myself though, this thread is in houserules and cranewings campaign is significantly different than mine.
So my first reaction to this and the boost fighter thread is pure snarkism, I am trying to get better though as it is not helpful.(as you can see by my posts, I fail alot at this :P)
Greg
- Have any caster use two hands for casting, the caster can hold a small shield or bonded item with no trouble.
- Increase the DC of concentration checks:
* DC 15 + spell level * 3, to cast defensively
* DC 15 + damage dealt + spell level * 3
* you can ignore the caster's ability modifier for concentration checks
- casters lose any dex or dodge bonus to AC while casting, making them easier to hit while casting.
- casting is a full round action, not even allowing a 5 foot step in the same round, metamagics probably shouldn't increase this further though.
- make step up feat a move option instead of a feat
- limit maximum number of spells known at one time
- casting spells can causes fatigue or exhaustion, possibly (ability)damage or negative levels
- spellcasting can not be done while exhausted, and with dificulty when fatigued
- crafting magical items might cause lasting damage uncurable while the item exists
- casting (arcane) magic frequently makes casters vulnerable to cold iron (or most metals), causing rashes and makes focusing arcane energy harder