I am trying to make a campaign that de-emphasises spellcasting a little without eliminating it completely. I don't mind, for example, a 20th level wizard being able to cast one ninth level spell. But I would like to slow spellcasting progression down. Which is the best way to do it?
Tell spellcaster characters to just subtract 3 from their class level when looking at the spell casting chart? The problem is they become too useless at lower levels.
Tell them to eliminate one spell for every 3 spell levels? For example, 1st and 2nd spell levels lose no spells but 3rd through 5th lose 1, 6th through 8th lose 2, and 9th level spells are reduced by 3.
Or some other way?
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Remove 9th level casting classes from your games. 6th level delays things more along the lines of what you're looking for.
On a side note, perhaps the word "delayed" would have been a better choice for this thread?
There are a number of ways to accomplish this. It really depends on what effect you really want to have.
Are you planning on playing in the 15th-20th level bracket a lot?
Restrict all your spellcasters to the Hellenic Sorcery rules.
It sounds like you just need to limit what spells can be known. So, casters may still gain their spell slots as normal, but they don't necessarily have spells of the maximum level to fill those slots. This creates a greater desire and better fit for metamagic. So mechanically, I suggest this:
* Full casters cannot learn a spell of higher spell level than 1+(1/3*caster level). This is nice, because it keeps full casters on the normal track until they hit level 5. And casters don't really need a reduction in the low levels, where they can very quickly and easily run out of spells for the day. If you feel this weakens full casters too much, consider giving them a free metamagic feat every 6th level.
* Half casters cannot learn a spell of higher spell level than 1+(1/4*caster level). This is mainly just done to make sure that half casters don't become better casters than full casters. You can consider giving them a free metamagic feat at 12th level.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It sounds like you just need to limit what spells can be known. So, casters may still gain their spell slots as normal, but they don't necessarily have spells of the maximum level to fill those slots. This creates a greater desire and better fit for metamagic. So mechanically, I suggest this:
* Full casters cannot learn a spell of higher spell level than 1+(1/3*caster level). This is nice, because it keeps full casters on the normal track until they hit level 5. And casters don't really need a reduction in the low levels, where they can very quickly and easily run out of spells for the day. If you feel this weakens full casters too much, consider giving them a free metamagic feat every 6th level.
* Half casters cannot learn a spell of higher spell level than 1+(1/4*caster level). This is mainly just done to make sure that half casters don't become better casters than full casters. You can consider giving them a free metamagic feat every 8th level.
Even simpler methods:
1. eliminate the spontaneous casting classes entirely
2. eliminate the free 2 spells per level for wizards and other book casters.
3. eliminate spell research. casters only get the spells you give them in terms of discovery from scrolls or looted spellbooks. Keep in mind that most wizards who aren't adventurers won't be carrying their books on their person but will have them well hidden and protected, frequently to the point of destruction.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Eliminate Spells over Level 6 but leave the 7-9th Level Spells Slots open, this way you get rid of the more broken high-end spells but allow for spellcasters to get some impressive spells in via Metamagic.
Adding to that it be prudent to give out free Metamagic feats to full-Spellcasters at around level 13 or so, so as to put too much strain on their Feat resource.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A key thing to point out, is that being a low level caster is troublesome at best, and downright dull at worst if your group is fairly optimized and like pushing on through several encounters a day.
The linear fighter vs quadratic wizard trope is due to the fact that the wizard gains power exponentially, so in the higher levels are positively godly in their ability to affect their environment. At the lower levels (1-4)... Not so much.
Another factor is this: Some of the most reality-bending spells are low level
knock, invisibility, feather fall, levitate, fly, spider climb, silence, detect alignment, zone of truth, ears of the street are all third level and lower and substantially change what can and can't be done within the game universe.
Removing 9th level spells is one thing, or even 9th level casters, but it won't stop any determined and experienced player from using and abusing magic to it's fullest, because the game as a whole has defaulted towards "spells will fix it" as a solution in preference to skills.
The way I see it, you have two choices: Either methodically go through the spell lists and compile a short list of permitted spells (with the default being "no, you can't know that spell unless it is on the list") and cull everything you don't want... Or talk with your players and get them to buy into the concept willingly.
Make magic no more reliable than doing it "naturally".
Or maybe.
Every magic action requires a skill check, a faileds fly check means you lose control, a second means you fall. A failed invisibility check means you are seen.
Or even.
Magic just enhances natural actions, fireballs, etc just enhance alchemical effects, invisibility enhances stealth. Magic might be more common, but less intrusive.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Even better: keep all those cool high-level spells fully available, but adjust casting time for all spells.
Casting time = spell level in rounds.
That would go a long way towards making magic more "special".
Restrict all your spellcasters to the Hellenic Sorcery rules.
What/where are those?
Probably this?
Yappers. I recommend the publication, it's good value for the price.
Thanks for the Hellenic stuff, an interesting variant.
I guess you think it was meant to be insulting.
It's more about "delayed", "slowed", or "hindered" spellcasting not "de-emphasized". That's the overall goal of the campaign, not what the thread was specifically meant to address.
Thanks for the Hellenic stuff, an interesting variant.
The Hellenic Sorceress is the goto choice if you want a campaign where fighting and rogue classes are heavily in the mainstay and spellcasting is pushed deep into the background. In this kind of campaign if you allow bards, it should be only in the non spellcasting archetypes, and you give everyone some form of out of combat recovery ability so that you don't need healbots.
Design Manager
|
I am trying to make a campaign that de-emphasises spellcasting a little without eliminating it completely. I don't mind, for example, a 20th level wizard being able to cast one ninth level spell. But I would like to slow spellcasting progression down. Which is the best way to do it?
Tell spellcaster characters to just subtract 3 from their class level when looking at the spell casting chart? The problem is they become too useless at lower levels.
Tell them to eliminate one spell for every 3 spell levels? For example, 1st and 2nd spell levels lose no spells but 3rd through 5th lose 1, 6th through 8th lose 2, and 9th level spells are reduced by 3.
Or some other way?
How open are you to 3pp options? There are several magic systems out there that are designed around somewhat different balancing points and progressions than the core casting system that can serve similar purposes to reduced spellcasting, depending on what you're aiming for.
Akashic Mysteries is built around at-will magic that is functionally unlimited in number of uses but doesn't gain access to many effects that are in the 7th-9th level range. It works great across most campaign types from gritty to high magic.
Spheres of Power also has some at-will elements, but spellcasting has more customization you can tag onto it with casting traditions (essentially all the little side pieces that say how you can cast, like whether you have arcane spell failure, verbal components, if you need to take a point of damage to cast a spell, etc.), and magic itself is broken up into building blocks called sphere talents. Essentially, if a character wants to cast a spell like delayed blast fireball, they need to buy talents to learn how to blast with magic, how to use fire, how to shape it into circular blasts, and then how to put it all on a time delay. Something like firing a ray of fire you can do all day, but more powerful effects require you to spend points from a limited pool. You'll typically end up at roughly the same raw power as a core spellcaster (maybe a little lower), but the fact that you have to buy the individual building blocks of your spell effects will mean that you have less flexibility. You'll be good at the things you decide to do, but you'll have a harder time jumping over to other types of effects. Think of it kind of like spellcasting in Fairy Tail if you've ever seen that- the magic is balanced between the various people who use it, but if you've taught yourself how to do a bunch of fire magic themed spells, you may not be able to use healing or ice magic at all.
As others have mentioned, another thing you can do is simply remove the 9 level casters from the game. A party consisting of a Bard, Inquisitor, Paladin, and Warpriest can handle pretty much anything a group made up of a Wizard, Rogue, Fighter, and Cleric can, but won't have the higher end spells of the Wizard and Cleric.
Every level of a spell caster class must be followed by a non spellcaster level? Also have Spellcasting class always give a favored class bonus.
Ex: The party is Lvl 4. You can only have 2 levels of a Spellcasting class.
I see your point. At the same time, taking levels of fighter (and learning how to shoot), rogue (and becoming sneaky/finding traps) or whatnot won't kill them. But it could be reduced to every 3 levels of caster must use something else. Classes that have late Spellcasting (Paladins, Bloodagers, etc) don't count for the penalty. Classes with 2/3 Spellcasting don't count. It's only the full casters who get the hit.
Get fewer pure mages who bend reality every encounter. Powergamers then move towards other classes. And a 1 level dip after every 3 levels isn't character breaking. A wizard 15 / fighter (or rogue) 5 will still be powerful. Just not...game breakingly powerful. A sorceror 15 / paladin 5 (of Nethys) has flavor. Or a Druid 15 / barbarian 5. Heck, wild shape with rage would be fun.
Remove prepared full casters (including Arcanist), along with Wish and Miracle. That sets casting back a level and gets you closer to that small amount of ninth level casting.
|
Design Manager
|
Having played by this system in a long-running game, please no. Functionally, no one will ever cast higher than a 2nd level spell straight up unless it's out of combat. What they will do is go wand-crazy, as that's a full on workaround.Even better: keep all those cool high-level spells fully available, but adjust casting time for all spells.
Casting time = spell level in rounds.
That would go a long way towards making magic more "special".
First, yeah one round per spell level is too extreme.
Second- allowing wands to be a work-around violates the spirit of the houserule.
Was thinking a similar thought, you'd naturally have to adjust spell activation and spell trigger items to reflect the new reality, probably just converting them into spell storage repositories where you can draw the spell and energy out but the actual execution takes just as long as casting the spell normally.
I'd thought about using the Adept casting progression, but I think that just ended up extending the frustrating first few levels for casters.
You could modify the Kineticist and use it as a chassis for a wizard. Change the word "Kineticist" to "Wizard." Change the effective stat from "Constitution" to "Intelligence" and modify the burn mechanic (detailed below).
It will look like a wizard, but be able to do a lot less.
Change Burn to read:
Burn (Ex): At 1st level, a wizard can overexert herself to channel more power than normal, pushing past the limit of what is safe for her mind by accepting burn. Some of her wild talents allow her to accept burn in exchange for a greater effect, while others require her to accept a certain amount of burn to use that talent at all. Burn can't be reduced or redirected. A wizard can accept only 1 point of burn per round. This limit rises to 2 points of burn at 6th level, and rises by 1 additional point every 3 levels thereafter. A wizard can't choose to accept burn if it would put her total number of points of burn higher than 3 + her Intelligence modifier (though she can be forced to accept more burn from a source outside her control). A wizard with burn total equal to or higher than 3 + her Intelligence modifier is fatigued. A wizard with burn total equal to or higher than 4 + her Intelligence modifier is exhausted. A wizard with burn total equal to or higher than 5 + her Intelligence modifier is unconscious for 1 minute, after which she is exhausted and cannot use her Wild Talents or Kinetic Blasts.
Fatigue and exhaustion caused by burn can't be healed or removed by any means other than getting a full night's rest, which removes all burn as well as fatigue and exhaustion caused by burn.
How about miscasting?
Everytime you cast a spell, you need to roll equal to the spell level. You can roll 1d6 per caster level. If you roll a double, you miscast the spell. It is cast, but the DM rolls on a chart and...something bad happens. Triples, quadruples, etc, make for MUCH worse results.
So a lvl 1 spell just needs you to roll a 1 on a 1d6. No chance of miscasting, can always cast those spells safely.
A lvl 2 spell needs a roll of a 2. You can roll a 1d6 and risk not casting the spell, or roll 2d6 and guarantee it with the chance of a miscast. If the results aren't too bad, it might be worth doing so.
But when you eventually get up to lvl 9 spells...you'll probably want to use 3 dice to cast it. But that means a fairly high chance of getting a miscast.
Further allow wizards to 'cast safely' but really taking their time to cast spells. This allows them to re-roll one of the dice, but it increases casting time from a standard action to a full round action.
This puts in an element of risk for casting classes, while not taking away their reality bending abilities. Because lets face it. If you are beating up the laws of physics and making it bend to your will, there should be the chance of something going wrong.
Do you want people to still play, and enjoy playing, spellcasters?
I've played a system with miscasting. It was awesome. It made you think before you cast spells and weigh the balance of how much power to use.
Why should remaking reality be completely safe?
I think dropping the spells per day or having "metamagic only" spells per day at higher levels, plus restricting spell lists is the most ideal way of going about it.
Also restrict creation of scrolls, wands, potions, etc.
How about miscasting?
Everytime you cast a spell, you need to roll equal to the spell level. You can roll 1d6 per caster level. If you roll a double, you miscast the spell. It is cast, but the DM rolls on a chart and...something bad happens. Triples, quadruples, etc, make for MUCH worse results.
So a lvl 1 spell just needs you to roll a 1 on a 1d6. No chance of miscasting, can always cast those spells safely.
A lvl 2 spell needs a roll of a 2. You can roll a 1d6 and risk not casting the spell, or roll 2d6 and guarantee it with the chance of a miscast. If the results aren't too bad, it might be worth doing so.
But when you eventually get up to lvl 9 spells...you'll probably want to use 3 dice to cast it. But that means a fairly high chance of getting a miscast.
Further allow wizards to 'cast safely' but really taking their time to cast spells. This allows them to re-roll one of the dice, but it increases casting time from a standard action to a full round action.
This puts in an element of risk for casting classes, while not taking away their reality bending abilities. Because lets face it. If you are beating up the laws of physics and making it bend to your will, there should be the chance of something going wrong.
Do you lose the spell if you fail to cast it (or miscast it)? Otherwise, it only addresses the spells cast in combat, which is only part of the Magic Solves Everything problem.
Definitely going to be echoing Ssalarn's recommendation of Spheres of Power, a talent-based magic system. A Spheres game without the advanced talents makes for a great low-magic setting. The effects a spherecaster can create will still be impressive and mechanically useful, but you won't see them creating demiplanes, teleporting across the world, or even raising the dead. Those and more are the purview of the optional advanced talents. You'll also see your spherecasters specializing in certain types of magic, like illusions or transformations, since you only have so many talents to spend.
Having played by this system in a long-running game, please no. Functionally, no one will ever cast higher than a 2nd level spell straight up unless it's out of combat. What they will do is go wand-crazy, as that's a full on workaround.Even better: keep all those cool high-level spells fully available, but adjust casting time for all spells.
Casting time = spell level in rounds.
That would go a long way towards making magic more "special".
First, yeah one round per spell level is too extreme.
Second- allowing wands to be a work-around violates the spirit of the houserule.
If one round per level is "too extreme" you can find a compromise somewhere, say (spell level) / 2 (round down), so that 2nd and 3rd level spells become full round actions, 4th and 5th require two rounds, and so on. The request was to "de-emphasize spellcasters" and this is a houserule that would do it.
Of course, the same thing would apply to the enemy.
And it would give martial PCs a decided boost over their godlike spellcasting brethren.
The other option is to have some system of spell failure and negative consequences, like in Warhammer RPG, where the more powerful the spell, the higher the chance of bad juju.
And the other, other option is to have spellcasting drain something - whether it is constitution, hit points, INT or whatever. Something to make Great Power come with a Great Cost.
As things stand, spellcasters rule the field above a certain level.
How about having drow be the main villains of your campaign? Having lots of spell resistance could give a small leg up to martials.
|
Design Manager
|
How about having drow be the main villains of your campaign? Having lots of spell resistance could give a small leg up to martials.
Depending on the nature of the spellcasting issues, that may not make much of a difference. Spell resistance is both a double-edged sword, blocking out beneficial and harmful effects alike, and fairly easy to circumvent. If you focus on, for example, conjuration spells for your blasting, spell resistance may never matter at all since none of your spells will be impeded by it.