Today an issue got brought up which caused me to go back to some of the basic rules on actions. Started a 15th level dragon hunt campaign, and the dm informed me, that my level 15 cleric could not cast two standard action spells in a round, as a full round action. The ranger could let off many arrows, but I could only let off 1 spell, regardless of my bab and level.
Now I went back and looked things over and the stance is not unfounded. A spell is a standard, there is only one standard in a round at its most simplest mechanics. Melee and ranged characters, once they get to +6/+1 bab, can make two attacks (formerly one was a standard) at least as part of a full round. I had always assumed this was just fine and also applied to spellcasting (not for full round spells of course). The Dm has come down with the decision, no, a spellcaster can only cast one standard and make one move action per round.
This isn't how I run my games, if a spellcaster has good bab, they can let off more spells. High level clerics, 8+ can mix their offence and defensive spells, wizards can let off more than one once they get to level 12. Now this guy has gone one step further in hampering spellcasters and said, even a haste potion once imbibed will not allow quicker spellcasting and more in a round.
So I put it to you all, what do you think? I've noticed some pathfinder spellcaster bosses can get more spells off in a round than 1. I can see the argument, but I personally go by the bab. The higher level spellcaster can cast quicker than the beginner. The guy is using core.
|
Today an issue got brought up which caused me to go back to some of the basic rules on actions. Started a 15th level dragon hunt campaign, and the dm informed me, that my level 15 cleric could not cast two standard action spells in a round, as a full round action. The ranger could let off many arrows, but I could only let off 1 spell, regardless of my bab and level.
Now I went back and looked things over and the stance is not unfounded. A spell is a standard, there is only one standard in a round at its most simplest mechanics. Melee and ranged characters, once they get to +6/+1 bab, can make two attacks (formerly one was a standard) at least as part of a full round. I had always assumed this was just fine and also applied to spellcasting (not for full round spells of course). The Dm has come down with the decision, no, a spellcaster can only cast one standard and make one move action per round.
This isn't how I run my games, if a spellcaster has good bab, they can let off more spells. High level clerics, 8+ can mix their offence and defensive spells, wizards can let off more than one once they get to level 12. Now this guy has gone one step further in hampering spellcasters and said, even a haste potion once imbibed will not allow quicker spellcasting and more in a round.
So I put it to you all, what do you think? I've noticed some pathfinder spellcaster bosses can get more spells off in a round than 1. I can see the argument, but I personally go by the bab. The higher level spellcaster can cast quicker than the beginner. The guy is using core.
Your GM is correct. Unless you use the Quicken Spell feat (or a metamagic rod of quicken).
Spells tend to have far more dramatic effects then attacks do, it's not a nerf it's one of the methods spell-casters are balanced against martial classes. (There are many on the boards who will tell you martials still get the raw end of the deal).
In any case, I hope you enjoy your game :)
The only way to get off two spells in a single round is to apply the Quickened metamagic feat (or use a Metamagic rod). This is a deliberate design decision to preserve game balance, since a single spell, especially at higher levels, can be much more powerful than any melee or ranged attack.
At your level, you can easily afford a Quicken Spell rod. Also, I agree with the others, a spellcaster can do far more in one round than a ranger with a few extra arrows. I managed to drop a Ming Fog on a group of enemies today. Next round I cast Fear. Five baddies gone in two rounds. I'd like to see a fighter manage that kind of damage prevention and combat advantage!
So melee and ranged, as they level up, get to do more actions as part of their full round. Spellcasters do not. The technique of the fighter/barb etc gets better, but the wizard/cleric etc never gets quicker or more effective at the action of casting?
So a level 1, and a level 15, cast at the same speed? I am thinking this is exactly what the rules say, and it is b~%~!##s.
To a man in black, I have run spellcasting by bab for many years (hence why this topic is funny, but I put it up anyway) and spellcasters are still defeatable. You get in close, mage-killer, held-actions, you grapple, you conceal yourself, emphasise a good save. They can be killed off.
As players they don't get two for some time, and then they can burn through them quicker, that is their choice. It won't always be smart to do that, or safe. A 15 minute day might be good for the spellcaster, I never allow that, something is going to come along or react.
Look at a level 20 fighter. He's got a BAB of 20/15/10/5. That's at least 4 attacks by BAB alone. Say he's swinging with his greatsword, and doing an average of 75 damage a swing. So he does 300 damage a round. Look at a 20th level Wizard. If you used BAB = more spells, he'd be able to fire off two spells. So he casts Wish, twice. Who do you think is more powerful, the guy who hits things really hard, or the guy who just warped the entirety of reality with his mind? The power of a casters spells scales up faster than a martial characters weapons.
|
So melee and ranged, as they level up, get to do more actions as part of their full round. Spellcasters do not. The technique of the fighter/barb etc gets better, but the wizard/cleric etc never gets quicker or more effective at the action of casting?
So a level 1, and a level 15, cast at the same speed? I am thinking this is exactly what the rules say, and it is b*#~@!!s.
This situation is represented with the Quicken Spell feat. Why should your Base Attack Bonus, the measure of your martial prowess, have any effect on your spellcasting prowess?
Some of us go as far as to make ALL spells full-round actions.
You have to specify wish though, very carefully, it can take a while. Wish also won't come into the majority of games.
This is rather startling. So this bab spellscasting "heresy" has actually come quite a way in my experience. I make five dms that I know whom have gone this way (not trying appeal to the majority here, just observing).
Continuing, it makes them damn interesting opponents. You really have to shut them down, murder them quick. We've had games with spells flying all over the place, so as a friend said i have been "doing it entirely fun with spellcasters". I mentioned the grapple and other tactics, you can also as a 3.5 ninja, hold actions till something is just about cast, jump into ethereal or shadow to really throw them off (or just use invis) to break line of sight.
Now on damage, damage dealing spellcasters can go pretty far and high, but the bucket o dice is often absent of modifiers (it is 10d6, not 6d6+30), melee or ranged (damn ranged can be scary) can compete, and the spellcaster can't keep it up forever. As they burn their best, they have to go down the spell list, steadily running lower and getting less effective. I do take the point that yep, they have things they can do that the others cannot, effects and such.
To Triomegazero, because your martial prowess determines how seasoned you are, how good you are in combat and how many attacks you have. Since all get it in one form or another, I never even considered it wouldn't apply to spellcasting adventurers whom are also getting quicker and better along with the rest.
For a wizard it doesn't really represent sword-work, but then again, he doesn't focus on sword-work, he focuses on spell-casting.
|
So wait. You were playing in someone else's game, and the DM wouldn't follow the houserule that you use?
I think he was in the right, and the rules are that way for a reason. A fighter with 4-5 attacks per round cannot have as big an impact as a wizard with a standard action and a quickened action.
Also, why isn't this in the houserules forum?
So melee and ranged, as they level up, get to do more actions as part of their full round. Spellcasters do not. The technique of the fighter/barb etc gets better, but the wizard/cleric etc never gets quicker or more effective at the action of casting?
So a level 1, and a level 15, cast at the same speed? I am thinking this is exactly what the rules say, and it is b!%#!@+s.
To a man in black, I have run spellcasting by bab for many years (hence why this topic is funny, but I put it up anyway) and spellcasters are still defeatable. You get in close, mage-killer, held-actions, you grapple, you conceal yourself, emphasise a good save. They can be killed off.
As players they don't get two for some time, and then they can burn through them quicker, that is their choice. It won't always be smart to do that, or safe. A 15 minute day might be good for the spellcaster, I never allow that, something is going to come along or react.
Most people would assume you are trolling.
Anyways, why on earth would clerics cast faster than a wizard or an eldritch knight cast faster than a single class wizard, if you apply such rules at least do it by caster level not by BAB.
Also since itterative attacks are less effective the follow up spells should be less effective as well, I'd also suggest it only applies to offensive spells, since that is all that BAB really does for any character.
I'd rather suggest you give spellcasters some kind of offensive class ability to shoot bolts of energy if you want them to have similar abilities, spells are way to diverse and high impact to allow casting multiple spells in a round, unless they are being played somewhat less intelligently.
Perhaps, not a bad idea.
In the descriptions of the classes, it always made sense to me the more martial cleric would get into two spells quicker than the academic wizard. The wizard has a different spell list, his mind is the personal source of his power. The melee competent cleric plugged into the deity unlocks the two spells a tad faster in the during combat sense. When the wizard gets there he might be more effective.
Bab also allowed some interesting builds, low level wizard, mid level melee getting into the two spells just a bit quicker.
Not saying I am right guys, just saying this is how I've done it and seen it done and it has been pretty fun (we also had a good time laughing at the mid level spellcasters who ran out of spells when the fight/quest wasn't over).
Not in hombrew because I didn't realise it was homebrew (it was all I knew) and I am asking about the verdict according to this system, hence general discussion.
Not a troll. I swear. I'm a rust monster see (or a nishruu).
|
|
I assumed it was trolling too, but I failed my will save. I would say the general opinion on this board is that casters are already more powerful than non-casters (see the CMD thread for details and some funny allcaps), and that's why the reaction to this was rather strong.
If it works for you guys, then go for it, but understand that you will get into a few disagreements.,
I don't mind disagreements, I'm not trying to win an argument here.
And it all started because in playing my level 15 healer, I got told I could only do 1 standard a round. How am I meant to keep everyone topped up with one spell a round I thought? What the, my bab is quite decent.
So, wait. Does that mean an old dragon in using their spellcasting abilities, only lets off one a round too? That seems a bit flat. It is like this weird rule of existence that is only broken by quicken feats or a magic item.
I miss my second ed spell sequencers.
Mergy, that's a nice metal helmet you've got there *talking rust monster gets closer*.
Well it is a healer character... (as per the healer class, 3.5).
I also apply it to every and all spellcasters. The funniest usage ever was a transmuter using dance of ruin twice on a blackguard (oh how he danced). The blackguard (an enemy) survived actually and took the wiz to negatives. Later they became fast friends, with his demonic dancing and the blackguards axe-fu.
What does action economy mean?
These changes are how its been run in the groups I've been a part of since 3rd ed.
|
|
First of all, they're right that healing is a weak action, when compared with battlefield control and buffing that a cleric could be up to.
Action economy is the number of actions each character gets and the power balance that results. Consider that a melee character often must move and attack on most turns. That's their whole turn, one move, and one attack. A ranged character does better, as they can often full attack every turn.
A caster, on the other hand, CAN get off two spells in one turn AND move, with the help of an easily buyable rod of quicken spell. Which seems more powerful for a given combat?
And it's not enough to say that the caster has finite resources, because the martial character's do as well: hitpoints. And it's often far easier to run out of hitpoints than to run out of spells.
Loving the healer, quite nice and simple spell list. Aaaaah less accounting.
As for the swashbuckler, well one with a good int can be quite the dashing and effective injurer. Can be pretty on the skills as well. Nice two weapon fighters, good brawlers, nice mobility. To balance with pathfinder some small additions can be made (movement or bluff bonus).
To Mergy the tasty helmet, well you are right there. The norm it seems is the two spells and the move with the quicken or rod. In my games, we don't see many of those rods, spellcasters instead choose to go the full round casting, using all available attacks from bab. So yeah they throw the spells around for a bit, but can't move much save the 5. Two and a move is more powerful than two with no move, so I'm not sure our option is overpowered.
Does everyone take these rods to solve the one a round problem? It's not something I do, see, or encourage as the dm. We push on to the bab mark and don't solve the problem with an item, but with levels and experience.
The ranger getting mauled by the elder elemental seemed happy for the healing and not dying.
|
|
Let's simplify this a little.
3.5L, you are playing 3e/PF in a way that in no way resembles the way the people you're talking to play it. Suffice it to say that there are problems with your house rules, problems that would keep many other players from using them, and that's why they're not anything like universal. If you don't like that new GM's house rules, just play a martial character or something, you'll be fine.
+1
;-)
So an alchemist could throw a bomb and cast a spell in the same round? A witch could spell and hex?
Except it does highly resemble it, because an item is often used to add an extra spell per round, over multiple rounds. This, and the move is still left over when using the item in the official version of actions means we are not so far apart, but doing the two legally gives a move advantage over the two or more via full-round.
The problems don't keep it from being universal, that I don't have companies and distributors pushing my idea of bab, actions and spell casting is what keeps it from being universal. The realities behind publishing must be kept in mind if we are discussing reach and audience. The multiple spells in a round is already done via other means through other players. It doesn't break the game, it makes it exciting.
You really want to gank the boss mage.
I'd play a martial character, but I play martial characters all the time, and enjoy taking down those dangerous spellcasters. Yes, it is actually possible.
3.5 Loyalist, if you want to see some possible reasons to not use the multiple-spell rule you're used to, try this. Go look around the boards here until you find one of the DPR Olympics threads to get an idea what a martial character can really do. Then go read up on spellcasters. I would suggest reading Treantmonk's guide for wizards, as well as some of the threads on the feat Spell Perfection; Ravingdork posted a build in one of them. Pay close attention to some of the things wizards can do when they engage in battlefield control (though Ravingdork's character isn't one of those), and imagine some worst case scenarios where casters get their spells off first by winning initiative. Things like multiple enervation spells hitting your martial character, fields of solid fog and black tentacles, etc.
3.5 Loyalist, if you want to see some possible reasons to not use the multiple-spell rule you're used to, try this. Go look around the boards here until you find one of the DPR Olympics threads to get an idea what a martial character can really do. Then go read up on spellcasters. I would suggest reading Treantmonk's guide for wizards, as well as some of the threads on the feat Spell Perfection; Ravingdork posted a build in one of them. Pay close attention to some of the things wizards can do when they engage in battlefield control (though Ravingdork's character isn't one of those), and imagine some worst case scenarios where casters get their spells off first by winning initiative. Things like multiple enervation spells hitting your martial character, fields of solid fog and black tentacles, etc.Or don't, and keep on doing what you're doing.
You're really not playing it wrong, and if everyone's okay with it, no real sense changing things.
Or this, yes. Thanks AMiB, forgot to add the most important part.
Hmm, well power gaming is watched for in the games I am in or run, and the other games where this interpretation has run. So certain wizardly prestige classes, certain feats are just not kosher. We have had some bad experiences of feat and prestige combos. Not so much problem the two spells a round, more the power gaming overall.
Never heard of spell perfection, not sure it is balanced. Info?
I'm more focused on making martial characters, tried all sorts but I have seen various combos tied to black tentacles and other area spells come out. Yeah they sure can be nasty.
Cheers A Man in black, yeah it worked up till now so I didn't think of changing it. It is good to see what you all have to say, but I'm not sure loopholeing (rod) is better than just allowing the possibility tied to level advancement. It especially seems balanced by the SR of many monsters and bosses coming out of paizo.
Cast! Cast! ... zip
Damn you SR!!!
I have SR impotence.
YOU MOCK MY PAIN!
(Well it can get pretty high on some monsters and bosses)
Hmm, well power gaming is watched for in the games I am in or run, and the other games where this interpretation has run. So certain wizardly prestige classes, certain feats are just not kosher. We have had some bad experiences of feat and prestige combos. Not so much problem the two spells a round, more the power gaming overall.
Never heard of spell perfection, not sure it is balanced. Info?
I'm more focused on making martial characters, tried all sorts but I have seen various combos tied to black tentacles and other area spells come out. Yeah they sure can be nasty.
Cheers A Man in black, yeah it worked up till now so I didn't think of changing it. It is good to see what you all have to say, but I'm not sure loopholeing (rod) is better than just allowing the possibility tied to level advancement. It especially seems balanced by the SR of many monsters and bosses coming out of paizo.
Cast! Cast! ... zip
Damn you SR!!!
I'd say the rods are too cheap for what they can do, but they are still a considerable expense to get that benefit which casters in your campaigns don't have to use on rods. The rods tend to be limited by spell level they can affect as well, a rod of quicken lvl 1 to 3 spells are quite common, but higher level rods less so I think.
A proper balancing factor might be limiting the spell level for the 2nd spell you cast in a round.
Spell Perfection is from the APG. Not going to come up till 15th level due to prereq of Spellcraft 15 ranks. You pick one spell for the feat to apply to. You may apply any one metamagic feat you have without affecting the level or casting time, so long as the total modified level doesn't exceed 9th level. All feats which apply a set numerical bonus to the spell (e.g. Spell Focus, Spell Penetration, Weapon Focus, etc.) are doubled. With the proper combination of feats, traits, etc. you can do some spectacularly rude things. I'm still in awe of the flesh to stone uses for this spell; that's Ravingdork's idea.
Your GM is reading the rules correctly. It has been that way since 3.0.
Spellcasters don't need the help. Compare the value of an additional attack on a full attack run (taken at a -5 penalty, mind you) to a single standard action spell of any kind. The attack is entirely contingent on taking a risky position in the fight.
I'll grant you that archers get to be a little ridiculous with the attacks they can make in 6 seconds. I prefer to nerf archers, for this reason plus the fact that they lead the pack of all martial types in power. Martials should get nice things, but I'd prefer to raise all boats than simply allow preposterous feats of archery to be the norm.
Ah Evil Lincoln, could you tell me how you nerfed archers?
Ah Evil Lincoln, could you tell me how you nerfed archers?
Actually, I haven't needed to yet, since none of my PCs is playing an archer.
I am generally unsatisfied with the way ranged weapons play with the combat round though. More than 3 arrows in six seconds is sort of ridiculous, and the crossbows are even more ridiculous but they have to be keep up. Normally, I am not bothered by considerations of realism, but this one is just too much for me.
If I had to force a solution, it would probably be something like forced vital strike instead of additional attacks. I don't house rule for my own preference though, I wait until it becomes a problem for the game... in this case it hasn't. When someone wants to play an archer or a crossbowman, it might be unavoidable. I just can't picture a crossbow being shot multiple times in 6 seconds.
Ah Evil Lincoln, could you tell me how you nerfed archers?Actually, I haven't needed to yet, since none of my PCs is playing an archer.
I am generally unsatisfied with the way ranged weapons play with the combat round though. More than 3 arrows in six seconds is sort of ridiculous, and the crossbows are even more ridiculous but they have to be keep up. Normally, I am not bothered by considerations of realism, but this one is just too much for me.
If I had to force a solution, it would probably be something like forced vital strike instead of additional attacks. I don't house rule for my own preference though, I wait until it becomes a problem for the game... in this case it hasn't. When someone wants to play an archer or a crossbowman, it might be unavoidable. I just can't picture a crossbow being shot multiple times in 6 seconds.
I do agree that the rules strongly favor only quickened spells as a second spell in a round. But EL brought up a good Tangent:
So something along the lines of the gunslinger one shot, multiple attacks? Or really just granting a Vital Strike effect?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Roakar is Barbarian Of The We Ar Barbarians Movement. Roakar Say Give Puny Caster His Two Spells. Roakar And Otter Barbarians Still Smash Face. Steal Magic From Squishy Caster Man. No Melee-Squishy Disparity (Roakar Has More Intelligence Than Otter Barbarians Who Can Not Say Disparity). Only Barbarian-Not Barbarian Disparity. Roakar Smash Spells With Thunder Hammer. Roakar Smash All With Thunder Hammer.
Roakar Understand Rules. Roakar Say Use Magic Stick Cast Two Spells. If No Like Magic Stick Get Hammer. Join Barbarian Movement. Smash Squishies.
Except it does highly resemble it, because an item is often used to add an extra spell per round, over multiple rounds. This, and the move is still left over when using the item in the official version of actions means we are not so far apart, but doing the two legally gives a move advantage over the two or more via full-round.
The problems don't keep it from being universal, that I don't have companies and distributors pushing my idea of bab, actions and spell casting is what keeps it from being universal. The realities behind publishing must be kept in mind if we are discussing reach and audience. The multiple spells in a round is already done via other means through other players. It doesn't break the game, it makes it exciting.
You really want to gank the boss mage.
I'd play a martial character, but I play martial characters all the time, and enjoy taking down those dangerous spellcasters. Yes, it is actually possible.
It does not resemble your game because a Rod of Quicken Metamagic can only be used 3 times per day (per rod), AND they only affect spells of certain level ranges (1-3)(4-6)(7-9). Rods that affect higher level spells are more expensive than lower level rods.
So the difference is you're allowing casters to cast multiple spells a round, every round, but a metamagic rod will only work for 3 times per day.
Martial characters need multiple attacks to affect multiple creatures. Casters can do that with spells from level 1, frequently more dramatically. If casters got iterative spells, there would never be any reason to play a non-caster character, ever.
This idea I and some others have been running by, that multiple spells are possible with decent bab and as a full round doesn't break the game. Wizards don't get two till level 12, clerics get in earlier at 8. The cleric gets two spells earlier, but has a choice. They can buff and be as good as a well made melee say or throw round more offensive spells. If they don't buff, they have trouble with melee, whom are easily up to at least two attacks at 8. If they emphasise other spell actions, they can do a lot, but can be taken down if rushed, or if taken by surprise. They can play the offence and buffs 1,1 and try to last in the melee, but they need some back-up or they are toast.
On another note, haven't pathfinder spellcasting bosses been written up, in their tactics sections as if they can cast multiple spells per round? I was checking over Ileosa today and it seems her plans are she spells the party to death as a high level bard. It goes over the mixes each round. Some of which is not quickened. She doesn't have a wand of quickened spells.
And on spell perfection I don't use it/allow it, it seems a bit too powerful. You've got to watch a lot of that high end stuff.
3.5L, the simple fact is that additional attacks do not grant actions, they grant additional attack rolls as part of a full round action. The system you describe would have higher level fighters able to take three or more move actions...
Additional attacks are extremely limited, they are not as good as an additional standard action each turn. On top of this, they take a -5 penalty per attack.
It just isn't in the rules, this business about trading "attacks" for actions to cast spells. And if it were in the rules, I think it would be crazy overpowered in favor of casters.
The tactics sections you are referring to are either presenting quickened spells or presenting different options for casting. The rules don't allow a caster to cast multiple spells in the same round without a quicken.