Proposal for Ranger, Paladin, and Bard Spell lists and per days


Combat & Magic


Rather than try to give them a fullish spell list that is low-level (like 4/3/3/2 at 30th), go the other direction (2/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1 at 20th). Give them few spells that are appropriate to their character level. I mean, when a 15th level anything is tossing around 3rd or 4th level effects no one cares.

One of the problems this solves is the problem where a spell is placed at a lower level than it is on another list, so you get silliness like Bards making cheaper Wands of Charm Monster than the Wizard can.

Also, at higher levels you'll actually care about your spell progression, so you'll have less incentive to PrC.


I'd say keep the current progression, but make more paladin- ranger- and bard-only spells that would be interesting to players. Paladin had those sword enchanting spells. Keep following that path and it will be good enough.


People have to be able to do level-appropriate things. The most interesting 3rd level spell in the world is still something an 11th level character is going to ignore.


Not backward compatible. Not going to happen.


hogarth wrote:
Not backward compatible. Not going to happen.

Why not? Its not like anyone every used the spells of any of these classes? Its a dead section of the stat block, so complete replacement is just as easy as not using it (which is what happens).


I'm not really a fan of the bard or paladin being able to cast spells that would be as effective as time stop.


K wrote:
hogarth wrote:
Not backward compatible. Not going to happen.
Why not? Its not like anyone every used the spells of any of these classes? Its a dead section of the stat block, so complete replacement is just as easy as not using it (which is what happens).

I really don't know what to tell you. I can't argue with the merits of your suggestion, but it's 100% not going to happen so why bother talking about it on these boards?


hogarth wrote:
K wrote:
hogarth wrote:
Not backward compatible. Not going to happen.
Why not? Its not like anyone every used the spells of any of these classes? Its a dead section of the stat block, so complete replacement is just as easy as not using it (which is what happens).
I really don't know what to tell you. I can't argue with the merits of your suggestion, but it's 100% not going to happen so why bother talking about it on these boards?

The Barbarian on the blog looks like a 100% rewrite. Why not the other classes?

Like I said, its dead text right now.


K wrote:
People have to be able to do level-appropriate things. The most interesting 3rd level spell in the world is still something an 11th level character is going to ignore.

3rd level Ranger spell does not need to be equal in effectiveness to 3rd level Wizard spell.

And I quite enjoy Rangers, Paladins and Bards as magic dabblers.

Sovereign Court

K wrote:
Why not? Its not like anyone every used the spells of any of these classes? Its a dead section of the stat block, so complete replacement is just as easy as not using it (which is what happens).

Um I don't know what game you're playing, but I've seen each of those classes use their spells like crazy, in a bunch of different games. I've never seen anyone complain that they were casting a 9th level wizards spell as a 5th level. Please don't say no one does this becuase you and your group don't. And what is the big deal if spells are different levels for different classes, you know how you avoid that cheaper problem, say well the only person making those is x and he is x, problem solution.


lastknightleft wrote:
K wrote:
Why not? Its not like anyone every used the spells of any of these classes? Its a dead section of the stat block, so complete replacement is just as easy as not using it (which is what happens).
Um I don't know what game you're playing, but I've seen each of those classes use their spells like crazy, in a bunch of different games. I've never seen anyone complain that they were casting a 9th level wizards spell as a 5th level. Please don't say no one does this becuase you and your group don't. And what is the big deal if spells are different levels for different classes, you know how you avoid that cheaper problem, say well the only person making those is x and he is x, problem solution.

I play in the RPGA and t conventions, and have played in several different games in different areas since 3.x came out.

That being said, I've never seen a Ranger or Paladin spell cast. Ever.

I have seen Bard spells cast, and those have been entirely Cures (though one NPC villain did cast a few sound bursts). Considering that I have never seen a mid or high level Bard, I think people figure out pretty soon that its a loser.

I admit that people will find uses for things that they are given. My problem is the assumption that non-viable combat actions for your level are expected from the mixed classes.


K wrote:
I mean, when a 15th level anything is tossing around 3rd or 4th level effects no one cares.

I disagree entirely. My last campaign had a 15th level party, and they loved their 2nd and 4th level spells. That's where all the best Buffs are located.

Really, that's what Paladin and Ranger spells are about, anyway.

Rez


K wrote:
I have seen Bard spells cast, and those have been entirely Cures (though one NPC villain did cast a few sound bursts). Considering that I have never seen a mid or high level Bard, I think people figure out pretty soon that its a loser.

I have a bard in my epic game that has gone up to 30th or 31st level, and is primarily a caster - picked up Epic Spellcasting, masterful uses of Projected Image, Greater Shouts (other than the avalanche that one time), yes Mass Cure's, Haste, and Dimension Doors.

K wrote:
I admit that people will find uses for things that they are given. My problem is the assumption that non-viable combat actions for your level are expected from the mixed classes.

I gotta say the 25th level Ranger in my party casting Delay Poison (a mere 1st level Ranger spell) after running into a Devastation Centipede (Poison save DC 94) was a pretty viable combat action.

Other than that, as someone else noted, most Ranger and Paladin spells are *not* combat spells. The exceptions are usually potent (Holy Sword), or effective (Entangle to hinder an army approaching).

Spells do not have to be *combat* spells to be viable.

All that said, your idea is interesting.


Rezdave wrote:
K wrote:
I mean, when a 15th level anything is tossing around 3rd or 4th level effects no one cares.

I disagree entirely. My last campaign had a 15th level party, and they loved their 2nd and 4th level spells. That's where all the best Buffs are located.

Really, that's what Paladin and Ranger spells are about, anyway.

Rez

Buffs are rarely a combat action, and thats the metric I'm judging these on. A bunch of little spells that you cast before combats do contribute to combat, but thats turn advantage talking, not the power of the spells.


The bard class is far from being a loser. It is a valuable addition to any party, and I feel that it is one of the few Core classes that comes close to a semblance of balance (the other two being the ranger and rogue).


Majuba wrote:
K wrote:
I have seen Bard spells cast, and those have been entirely Cures (though one NPC villain did cast a few sound bursts). Considering that I have never seen a mid or high level Bard, I think people figure out pretty soon that its a loser.
I have a bard in my epic game that has gone up to 30th or 31st level, and is primarily a caster - picked up Epic Spellcasting, masterful uses of Projected Image, Greater Shouts (other than the avalanche that one time), yes Mass Cure's, Haste, and Dimension Doors.

I'm not worried about characters well into an epic progression who is probably casting these spells as Quickened for free spells and has epic level amounts of wealth. I'm worried about the 10th level Bard who is a joke.

Majuba wrote:


K wrote:
I admit that people will find uses for things that they are given. My problem is the assumption that non-viable combat actions for your level are expected from the mixed classes.

I gotta say the 25th level Ranger in my party casting Delay Poison (a mere 1st level Ranger spell) after running into a Devastation Centipede (Poison save DC 94) was a pretty viable combat action.

Other than that, as someone else noted, most Ranger and Paladin spells are *not* combat spells. The exceptions are usually potent (Holy Sword), or effective (Entangle to hinder an army approaching).

Spells do not have to be *combat* spells to be viable.

All that said, your idea is interesting.

Like I said, people will find uses for spells they have. That doesn't mean that your Ranger shouldn't have had access to a real utility spell like heal.

On a personal note, how do you even get bitten by a Devastation Centipede? Those guys are designed for a guy with boots of flying to kill with arrows, or a single casting of a spell like shapechange (which lasts most of the day, so its not even wasted).

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Roleplaying Game / Alpha Playtest Feedback / Alpha Release 1 / Combat & Magic / Proposal for Ranger, Paladin, and Bard Spell lists and per days All Messageboards
Recent threads in Combat & Magic