Hey there,
one of the big problems i have with d20 is the magic system. I'm missing the risk factor when casting. I feel like the only risk in casting a spell is.. not having it up at a later point. So.. why not a spell fumble system (how one would implement this is a whole new question).
What's the problem with spell fumble in d20?
I feel like magic should be something dangerous, that you try to control as well as possible, but it can also go horribly wrong. In d20 it's mostly just working.. or not.
Is anyone of you using some sort of spell fumble?
If not: Why is it a bad idea?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am going to assume you mean a spell FAILURE system, where a spell will simply not work, as opposed to spells blowing up in your face or hurting teammates. Fumbles are never a good idea.
I don't use one predominantly because this stuff's complicated enough as it sits; plus, anything that increases randomization is inherently biased against the PCs. This would basically give someone two saves against every spell.
Well, actually I'm talking about a fumble system, yes.
Saying fumbles are never a good idea.. well i personaly like them for non-magical combat and others do, too.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't use any, but I'm open to it, and I have tried to come up with something.
My problem spellcaster:
What do fighters do? They hit stuff with a stick!
Always? Some times they miss...
Then what? They try again! :)
What do wizards do? They cast spells!
Always? Eventually they run out...
Then what? They're done for the day so they run away! :(
My idea for a solution:
A cast spell check: 1d20 + casting ability modifier ± situational stuff
DC 10 + spell level
Succes: they cast the spell
Failure: they waste their action, but the prepared spell or spell slot is not expended.
------------
Other thoughts for this:
(From memory; I lost the document, and I don't recall all the details)
- no daily limit on spells cast, but maybe a harder check or material cost or focus (eg. a wand for Potter-style), still a limit on prepared/known spells
- giving casters viable options other than casting their own spells
- giving all creatures a Spell Resistance, and making all spells "SR: yes"
- replacing saves with defenses that the caster should overcome in an attack roll(I think this is something 4E did, not sure)
I understand the desire to make spell casting a dangerous and risky business. It can add a sense of danger to the game.
But it also introduces the potential for total party wipes simply because a spell caster rolled a "1" at the worst possible time. Most people I know would not consider that "fun."
In my own campaign world I have a plot device that interferes with magical energy in such a way that casting spells in certain areas has potentially unpredictable results. This is known to the players and they can feel the effect themselves as they enter it. In fact, in my home game the players have just entered an area of spell randomness. I am very interested in seeing how they react to it.
They may not like it at all.
But it also introduces the potential for total party wipes simply because a spell caster rolled a "1" at the worst possible time. Most people I know would not consider that "fun."
I agree with that. Maybe it just doesn't fit with d20, because systems lowering the chances of a fumble are tedious (chains of 1's, using other dice). What i would like to see, is a really, really low chance of actually fumbling when casting your regular spells (or none at all), but giving the opportunity to cast a stronger spell (using free metamagic, similar stuff) and having a higher risk, when doing that. This would involve some nice risk/reward strategy in spellcasting and i as a player would enjoy it.
Of course this is sort of a complete overhaul of spellcasting.. but i just want to collect some ideas.
|
Pathfinder really could use a splat book on Magic systems. 2-4 page entries on how to run with various magic themes and systems that can work with current spells 9unlike words of power).
The caster can ignore this and cast the spell at minimum caster level for that spell slot with out needing to roll.
Otherwise he must roll a spell craft check DC = 10+spell level* (increase the DC by 5 for spell levels 3+, 5+, 7+, and 9). Failure means the spell is not cast, but is not expended. On a 1 and a failure the spell is lost in a display of magic.
Determine the fumble based on the school of the fumbled spell.
Example Evocation fumble table.
1 - The caster becomes exhausted + CL -4 for 1 min.
2 - the caster becomes fatigued + CL -2 for 1 min.
3 - The caster takes 1 damage for each empty spell slot you have
4 - Large flash of light or sound (GM choice)but other wise no effect
5 - The spell fails, but a ray of fire is launched. This is a range touch attack that does 1d4 fire damage per two caster levels.
6 - The spell is cast but does minimum damage, has its' duration reduced to just 1 round, or has its' save DC reduced by 5 (GM choice if more than one is appropriate).
7 - The spell fails and you can only cast evocation spells for the next hour.
8 - Choose another evocation spell of a lower spell level, cast that spell instead.
edit: setting a good spellcraft DC at all levels is hard
There ALREADY is a spell failure system, such as casting from a scroll for a spell that you cannot normally cast due to level.
Failure to cast due to violent movement/concentration loss.
Failing at Use Magic Device.
Failing due to Spell Failure because of wearing armor.so are you suggesting a spell failure / fumble system for spells you can currently cast?
If so - what is the balancing bonus for critical successes?
yes, i'm suggesting that. Overall i think magic is quite powerful, so from a balance point it's not a problem. But i think i'd need some crit success for the fun aspect. Still thinking about it.
Are you familiar with Wild Magic?
No, I was not. Just looked it up, that might be something i could use.
Are you interested in balance specifically, or how to balance the Spell Fumble system in regards to the current state of Pathfinder?
Because if you're out for pure balance, consider this:
A spellcaster may only have one ongoing effect happening at any one point in time, be it a buff, a control spell or debuff unless the caster wishes to make a concentration check (DC 15 + the total amount of spell levels your caster is keeping up on himself or another person.) whenever he is casting a spell. In case of failure, all the caster's ongoing effects disappear.
Exceptions:
Bear's Endurance and co.
Protection from (energy)
Infernal Healing
Ray of Frost or whatnot.
and other such stuff.
What this does:
The spellcaster is unable to cast fly and invisibility at the same time without triggering annoying checks for himself every round and every spell he casts while having both of them up.
Basically, it's balance.
This has been suggested before. Generally, it makes casting spells unfun by having your main class feature just randomly not work with not really any gameplay behind it. It's only recommended if you want a game/setting that discourages spellcasting.
|
This has been suggested before. Generally, it makes casting spells unfun by having your main class feature just randomly not work with not really any gameplay behind it. It's only recommended if you want a game/setting that discourages spellcasting.
Yep there better be some balancing factor or I'd be not playing in this kind of game At low levels I've had quite a few casters do the "I cower in the baggage for the rest of the fight" option and even with pathfinders unlimited cantrips the choice of I get closer to the people who can drop me in one hit With my magic armour up to do 1d3 damage is not appealing. It my limited spells that can actually help e.g. Grease on a rooftop archer have a uncontrolled chance to blow up in the party's face as well it won't be fun for me and no other players are going to want you around either.
EDIT
For that matter what about clerics do they get this spell fumble as well or are they immune to that in addition to better attack, being able to wear armour, turn undead with their divine power etc? If they have it that's really going to much up the groups
Cleric: "I cast heal" rolls dice 1 . . .
Gm rolls dice and checks table "The fighter is baleful polymorphed into a frog."
Cleric: "I can't cast that!"
GM "Sorry its on the fumble table of uncontrolled magical power." 5 hour fight ensues before cleric and DM storm off.
If they don't have it then that's really unfair to wizards or other arcane spellcasters.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think this idea is solid BUT requires a comprehensive overhaul to work. The issue is that there appears to be a lack of a direction. If you want spells to fumble, you first have to figure out why or what makes them fumble and then build around that. For example... what about creating a system where casting spells in quick succession increases the chance of fizzle? The first spell cast doesn't have penalties, but if you cast again on the next round there's a slight failure chance. Kind of like exhaustion.
I do want to point out that everyone who is saying things like "Don't punish a class doing what it does" or things like "Failure isn't fun." The irony is that this system is pathfinder, and there are high level fighters and rogues. When the summoner can perform any Tier 5 classes role better than they do, the discussion of nerfs should never be immediately tabled.
I think this idea is solid BUT requires a comprehensive overhaul to work. The issue is that there appears to be a lack of a direction. If you want spells to fumble, you first have to figure out why or what makes them fumble and then build around that. For example... what about creating a system where casting spells in quick succession increases the chance of fizzle? The first spell cast doesn't have penalties, but if you cast again on the next round there's a slight failure chance. Kind of like exhaustion.
I do want to point out that everyone who is saying things like "Don't punish a class doing what it does" or things like "Failure isn't fun." The irony is that this system is pathfinder, and there are high level fighters and rogues. When the summoner can perform any Tier 5 classes role better than they do, the discussion of nerfs should never be immediately tabled.
The wizard is still king, and the summoner is not doing the cleric's or druid's job. It is a better summoner than a druid, but that is something a druid can ignore and some do and still bring a lot to the table.
|
|
I think this idea is solid BUT requires a comprehensive overhaul to work. The issue is that there appears to be a lack of a direction. If you want spells to fumble, you first have to figure out why or what makes them fumble and then build around that. For example... what about creating a system where casting spells in quick succession increases the chance of fizzle? The first spell cast doesn't have penalties, but if you cast again on the next round there's a slight failure chance. Kind of like exhaustion.
I do want to point out that everyone who is saying things like "Don't punish a class doing what it does" or things like "Failure isn't fun." The irony is that this system is pathfinder, and there are high level fighters and rogues. When the summoner can perform any Tier 5 classes role better than they do, the discussion of nerfs should never be immediately tabled.
See I disagree, I feel nerfs should never be used. If one class/race/option is significantly more powerful you should consider BUFFING the others to be comparable. Once you start swinging a nerf bat you can wind up with a sitaution where the end result is no fun for anyone. Its part of why I left Diablo 3 (pre-ordered) and never bought the expansion because it was just nerf after nerf after nerf to try and balance things for their real money auction house.
I'm all for it, but I don't think many people would be. Pathfinder has inherited a lot of 3.x philosophy, and chief among them from the players perspective is a desire to "win", or have "loss" be due to something other than a single die roll. I've seen people flip out when their melee characters miss twice in a row, I don't think they would handle a wizard messing up a spell well either.
|
|
I'm all for it, but I don't think many people would be. Pathfinder has inherited a lot of 3.x philosophy, and chief among them from the players perspective is a desire to "win", or have "loss" be due to something other than a single die roll. I've seen people flip out when their melee characters miss twice in a row, I don't think they would handle a wizard messing up a spell well either.
There's also the fact that a melee fumble doesn't keep you from making the same attack millions of the same attack over the rest of the day, a spell fumble means you've lost at best 1/6th of your spells of that level per day for nothing, at worst you may lose 1/2 or more.
Wizards already have too few spell slots sooooo...
Feat: Extra spell
The caster can try to cast a spell even if they don't have it memorized or ran out of spell slots. They must will save against 10 + the caster level + the spell level. If they succeed they cast the spell. A nat. 20 always succeeds. If they fail they don't cast the spell and a random magic effect goes off. A nat. one always fails.
You can use a preexisting chart or make your own really bad one. You can offer this feat free to wizards or all spellcasters.
Here's a mostly bad chart.
1) Summon monster of the same level as the spell attempted. The monster is selected randomly from the list unless the monster would be helpless. They appear in a random empty space and attack the nearest creature because they are spooked. The monster vanishes when combat ends.
2) Sound Explosion: Entire area everyone takes 1D6 per spell level attempted and suffers a round of deafness per spell level if they fail the reflex save. If they succeed they suffer half the damage and no deafness. The would be caster cannot save for half or nothing no matter what.
3) Rock Rain: Everyone is attacked from above by 1 sling rock per spell level. Treat as if thrown by a warrior of the would be caster level. The stones all persist and cause broken terrain till removed.
Add your own or I'll think of more.
4) The Dead Will Walk: Nearest remains rise as undead the monster level of the spell level attempted. Total hit dice are the caster level attempted. Thus if there is nothing in the room zombies may come from the next room. Undead created this way have no master.
I use the Crit and fumble decks in my games and they work really good.I took out some of the more horrifying ones like "crit self/ally".
There are spell crits and fumbles as well and they are really fun.
They only trigger on spells that require an attack roll and only on nat 20...so they rarely come up,but when they do it's really memorable.