[Think Tank] Caster level based Save DC


New Rules Suggestions

Dark Archive

A similar thread was already started in the alpha 1 forum, but since it turned up in the psionics thread, I guess it might not be a bad idea to start a new one.
I would suppose to base the save DCs of a characters spells and power on his caster/manifester level + the governing attribute +10. This would follow the rules already used for the powers of monsters and it would reduce a divergence of spell usefulness at higher levels. While some spells like magic missile or scorching ray don't allow saves and are thus easily usable at higher levels, other like fireball or burning hands have somehow diminishing returns. It would also strengthen the usefulness of bard spells, something I don't view as a bad thing.
Heighten spell could be changed to increase the save DC of a spell which should also increase it's usefulness.
Since spells would still have damage limits and powers would still need power points to augment it would not be that overpowered as it might appear, but it would certainly be a step to remove the reservation many players have concerning psionics.


Toss heighten spell, it is THE most worthless metamagic feat in existance and doesn't need to exist. If you put a lower level spell in a higher slot, it should AUTOMATICALLY raise the DC, considering what you lose in the first place.

Actually, setting the spell/psionic save DC to 1/2 caster level has many advantages. Caster's won't automatically reach for their biggest spells, making lower level spells like Charm Person still have some usefulness at the higher levels of the game. Spells like Fireball won't have the double whammy of doing less damage AND being easier to save against than Delayed Blast Fireball. Casters can slightly relax in seeking out ways to pump up DC's, since all the spells will primarily have the same DC and likely spellcasters will be more willing to keep on moving when their "big guns" have been used and all they have is lower level spells.

The biggest con to this is that some of the partial casters get a bit a boost - Bards (who only get up to 6th level spells, but whose spell DCs would go up to +10), Rangers and Paladins.


I'm not sure about all the consequences but I tend like this idea.
Since Rangers and Paladins only have half their class level as caster level their DCs would be 10 + 1/4 class level (so 10 to 15 with a maximum of 4th level spells. No real problem or am I missing something?).

Dark Archive

Stephen Klauk wrote:

Toss heighten spell, it is THE most worthless metamagic feat in existance and doesn't need to exist. If you put a lower level spell in a higher slot, it should AUTOMATICALLY raise the DC, considering what you lose in the first place.

Actually, setting the spell/psionic save DC to 1/2 caster level has many advantages. Caster's won't automatically reach for their biggest spells, making lower level spells like Charm Person still have some usefulness at the higher levels of the game. Spells like Fireball won't have the double whammy of doing less damage AND being easier to save against than Delayed Blast Fireball. Casters can slightly relax in seeking out ways to pump up DC's, since all the spells will primarily have the same DC and likely spellcasters will be more willing to keep on moving when their "big guns" have been used and all they have is lower level spells.

The biggest con to this is that some of the partial casters get a bit a boost - Bards (who only get up to 6th level spells, but whose spell DCs would go up to +10), Rangers and Paladins.

I can't think of many ranger and paladin spells that even allow saves, so it won't make much of a difference. Bards on the other hand have long suffered from low save DCs for their spells. They already have a limited list and a limited number of spells per day. I see no reason why the irresistible dance of a bard should be less irresistible than one cast by a class that doesn't specializes in performance. Most people don't seem to believe the bard to be overpowered, so a little boost should be no problem.


My group has used 10 + 1/2 caster level + attribute for about 6 years. It works.


I'm definitely in favor of the 1/2 caster level for save DCs, it should have been that way in the first place.


I was very interested in this mechanic when it came up before. It gives a boost to casters, but primarily a longevity boost - letting them go longer, remaining effective. Vs. NPC's most battles won't last quite so long as for this to matter, and it lets the DM have a better selection of spells to be casting offensively with a chance of working.

This change would make very little difference at low levels. At higher levels it makes all spell DCs scale with the "Good" saves, instead having a wide variety.

I was also particularly interested in how this mechanic would combine with Magic Rating. Magic Rating lets multi-class casters stack their caster levels together (only for determination of spell effects), or add a bit to caster level for expertise gained from non-casting classes (1/4 of fighter levels, 1/2 of monk levels, etc.).

I've used Magic rating before, and it didn't cause much difference in power level from what I could see. I was concerned adding in caster level based spell DCs might be overpowered though, so I did a playtest of a 6/6 Drd/Wiz vs. 12 Drd and 12 Wiz (separately). The (PC) Drd/Wiz died in all three tests vs. the NPC Wiz (2 times), and Drd (1 time), but came close.

Suffice to say, I think they mesh very well to allow equivalent strength multi-class casters, without the semi-brokenness of Mystic Theurge, etc., plus retaining class features.


Here here. It doesn't actually add that much to wizard/cleric/druid power at all, what it does add is variety because more spells become worthwhile choices.

I have a more radical suggestion. Have every DC (not just spells, every level dependent one) use *Character Level*. Actually, also have caster level = character level. This makes multiclassing actually work. The disadvantage for multiclassing should be that you didn't get Wall of Force this level, not that your fireball didn't get better. Nth level characters should be able to do Nth level things, not perform like Cohorts.

Dark Archive

Squirrelloid wrote:
I have a more radical suggestion. Have every DC (not just spells, every level dependent one) use *Character Level*. Actually, also have caster level = character level. This makes multiclassing actually work. The disadvantage for multiclassing should be that you didn't get Wall of Force this level, not that your fireball didn't get better. Nth level characters should be able to do Nth level things, not perform like Cohorts.

Full character level might be a bit to powerful, but I would like something like initiator level. Full Class level + 1/2 * (Character level - Class level).


Jadeite wrote:
Squirrelloid wrote:
I have a more radical suggestion. Have every DC (not just spells, every level dependent one) use *Character Level*. Actually, also have caster level = character level. This makes multiclassing actually work. The disadvantage for multiclassing should be that you didn't get Wall of Force this level, not that your fireball didn't get better. Nth level characters should be able to do Nth level things, not perform like Cohorts.
Full character level might be a bit to powerful, but I would like something like initiator level. Full Class level + 1/2 * (Character level - Class level).

An ability is level-appropriate if its at your character level. If its at less than that, someone's cohort is seriously doing it better than you are. And that has to stop.


They are talking about save DCs squirrel. Saves only go up to 10 + 9 + ability score, so changing the max to 10 + 20 + ability score would be adding a heckuva lot of DC for casters. It would break the Saves system.

Unless you want saves to be +1 per level as well... but that point we might be getting into 4e territory.


Kaisoku wrote:

They are talking about save DCs squirrel. Saves only go up to 10 + 9 + ability score, so changing the max to 10 + 20 + ability score would be adding a heckuva lot of DC for casters. It would break the Saves system.

Unless you want saves to be +1 per level as well... but that point we might be getting into 4e territory.

******

I believe squirril was meaning that in additon to spells, that spell-like and supernatural abilities would also simply use the 'character level' = 'caster level' mechanic, not for save DC's to be replaced by character level instead of spell level.

so a cleric/paladin's smite evil would use his total character level

a fighter/mage would use his total character level when casting a fireball.

a (oh blah, cant think of a good spell-like for the life of me atm) would use its character level instead of its lower level. 10 hd monster with th level casting would prolly be a 10th level caster level in this example also.

******

now, i am not sure about this idea above.
squirrils plan would basically be implimenting the practiced spellcaster feat for a default instead of a purchase.

******

i do think that having DC scale up for spells of all levels to be based on the highest spell level you have to be a worthy consideration.

a 1st level wizard casts charm person and its 10+int bonus+1(spell level)

an 18th level wizard casts charm person and its 10+int bonus+ 9(highest spell level known)

to me, it feels like an archmage should have just more oomph to even his basic spells then an apprentice wizard.

in effect it would make the metamagic feat heighten spell obsolete as a side effect, but that wouldn't really make me lose any sleep.


Rathendar wrote:
Kaisoku wrote:

They are talking about save DCs squirrel. Saves only go up to 10 + 9 + ability score, so changing the max to 10 + 20 + ability score would be adding a heckuva lot of DC for casters. It would break the Saves system.

Unless you want saves to be +1 per level as well... but that point we might be getting into 4e territory.

******

I believe squirril was meaning that in additon to spells, that spell-like and supernatural abilities would also simply use the 'character level' = 'caster level' mechanic, not for save DC's to be replaced by character level instead of spell level.

so a cleric/paladin's smite evil would use his total character level

a fighter/mage would use his total character level when casting a fireball.

a (oh blah, cant think of a good spell-like for the life of me atm) would use its character level instead of its lower level. 10 hd monster with th level casting would prolly be a 10th level caster level in this example also.

There's actually two proposals in there.

(1) Your relevant level for anything is character level.

(2) Save DCs = 10 + 1/2 level + stat mod. This makes spells work like *every other fricking ability in the game*, as opposed to having their own bizarre system.

Which is a 1pt boost at level 20 relative to now (whatever) for 9th level spells. It also unifies DCs across spell levels, which is imho a good thing. And it unshafts classes like the Bard.

As the save progressions for monsters are on the same scales as characters, and monster save DCs use that progression, it can't possibly be unbalancing in an objective sense.


The confusion was when you said to make what part 1:1 ratio. If DCs are still adding only half caster level, then that's cool.

Yeah, a 1 point increase isn't that big a deal on DCs to be honest. Especially since there's very few increases to DCs possible compared to Saves (+2 vs +2), whereas Attack Bonus can skyrocket compared to AC scores.
I know there's reasons for it, however a 1 point bonus isn't the end of the world.

.
As per my Unified Spellcasting Slots thread, I'm obviously for anything that makes spellcasting more universal. The more we can make it like BAB is to the physical combat characters, the better.

And it's not like there isn't precedence within the game for non-casters to become more powerful in their mind. EVERYONE gains Will saves, if even only a little bit. It stands to reason their mind capacity would increase even if they train as a Fighter instead of a Wizard.

Actual training (or learned "skill") would then be the spells learned. DCs, caster level checks for spell resistance or duration/range/number of damage dice, etc, or even spell slots (my suggestion) could be based on "mental capacity", which even a Fighter would extend through basic experience.

I personally think limiting to lower level spells is limiting enough to warrant keeping the rest. A 1st level Wizard, 19th level Fighter with effective spellcasting power, but still only 1st level spells at best. Still won't have things like Wish. He'll just have a Burning Hands that might actually affect something.

Dark Archive

Squirrelloid wrote:


An ability is level-appropriate if its at your character level. If its at less than that, someone's cohort is seriously doing it better than you are. And that has to stop.

The problem is, that your proposed system overly favors spellcasting and manifesting classes, unless other class features also scale by character level. You might say that attack bonus already scales, but an attack bonus for itself is pretty useless. Giving half caster level for other classes is already pretty generous in my opinion. If you want full caster level advancement, it should at least be made a feat.

Associated Spellcasting (General)
Your spells are more powerful than those of other multiclasses characters.
Prerequesits: Caster level 1, multiclassed character
Benefit: Chose any one class. That class now counts as associated toward any one of your spellcasting classes. Levels in an associated class count fully toward caster level. Should the number of levels in the associated class exceed that of the spellcasting class, those excess levels count only half toward caster level as normal. Classes that grant spell advancement cannot be chosen for this feat since they already count as associated.
Special: This feat can be taken multiple times, each time applying to a new class.


Jadeite wrote:
Squirrelloid wrote:


An ability is level-appropriate if its at your character level. If its at less than that, someone's cohort is seriously doing it better than you are. And that has to stop.

The problem is, that your proposed system overly favors spellcasting and manifesting classes, unless other class features also scale by character level. You might say that attack bonus already scales, but an attack bonus for itself is pretty useless. Giving half caster level for other classes is already pretty generous in my opinion. If you want full caster level advancement, it should at least be made a feat.

Associated Spellcasting (General)
Your spells are more powerful than those of other multiclasses characters.
Prerequesits: Caster level 1, multiclassed character
Benefit: Chose any one class. That class now counts as associated toward any one of your spellcasting classes. Levels in an associated class count fully toward caster level. Should the number of levels in the associated class exceed that of the spellcasting class, those excess levels count only half toward caster level as normal. Classes that grant spell advancement cannot be chosen for this feat since they already count as associated.
Special: This feat can be taken multiple times, each time applying to a new class.

This is why multiclassing fails, because some people can't stand to see rules that actually make multiclassing work...

Seriously, no one will ever multiclass a caster with anything else except something that advances their casting without caster/character level transparency.

A level N character should cast a spell as a level N character. Otherwise that ability just isn't level appropriate and might as well not exist. Seriously, rather than take a level of wizard you could *take a cohort* who would cast better than you did, even for just that one spell, and you only sacrificed a feat instead of a whole level. (Take a level of fighter to reclaim the feat if you must - it'll be better for you if you aren't a caster. Or if you are a fighter, you really didn't miss that feat).

The disadvantage to not advancing wizard are you don't get new spells and new spell levels. Caster level need have nothing to do with it.

This does not encourage spellcasters to multiclass out (because those higher level spells are hugely valuable and worth more than anything they could possibly ever get by multiclassing), but what it does encourage is multiclassing *in* to spellcasting classes and allows fighter/mage concepts using just the core rules that are actually functional.

It also nicely removes all the stupidity with classes like Ur Priest that redefine your caster level to crazy go-nuts numbers. CL = Character Level. That's it. Simple, makes multiclassing work, makes characters never feel worse than their cohort when doing the same task. Its good for the game.

Dark Archive

Squirrelloid wrote:


This is why multiclassing fails, because some people can't stand to see rules that actually make multiclassing work...

Seriously, no one will ever multiclass a caster with anything else except something that advances their casting without caster/character level transparency.

A level N character should cast a spell as a level N character. Otherwise that ability just isn't level appropriate and might as well not exist. Seriously, rather than take a level of wizard you could *take a cohort* who would cast better than you did, even for just that one spell, and you only sacrificed a feat instead of a whole level. (Take a level of fighter to reclaim the feat if you must - it'll be...

But what about multiclassed noncasters? Shouldn't a rogues sneak attack also scale with character level? What about barbarian rage or a paladin's smite? Should someone with a fighter level gain increased feat access? I understand your point, but your solution is too one-sided. You should either give some kind of character level based powers to all classes or to none at all.


Squirrelloid wrote:
This is why multiclassing fails, because some people can't stand to see rules that actually make multiclassing work...

Since when does multiclassing fail? As a long-time player of generalist characters, the only reason why you think multiclassing fails is because you fail at playing generalists.

As for the OP, Heighten Spell is the solution to this problem. A level 1 spell should not have a significant chance of affecting a higher-level character unless it is somehow enhanced. Weapon Focus bonuses get swallowed by high levels unless you take more, a d6 sneak attack bonus gets swallowed by high levels unless you get more, level 1 spells should also be swallowed by high levels unless you gain more.

I also disagree that Heighten Spell should be automatic, but that's a stylistic issue on my part, not one of game-balance.

Dark Archive

Pneumonica wrote:


As for the OP, Heighten Spell is the solution to this problem. A level 1 spell should not have a significant chance of affecting a higher-level character unless it is somehow enhanced. Weapon Focus bonuses get swallowed by high levels unless you take more, a d6 sneak attack bonus gets swallowed by high levels unless you get more, level 1 spells should also be swallowed by high levels unless you gain more.

I also disagree that Heighten Spell should be automatic, but that's a stylistic issue on my part, not one of game-balance.

There are already low level spells which retain their general usefulness even at higher levels. Scorching ray and ray of enfeeblement are both ranged touch attacks, so they both have a pretty good chance of affecting a high level character (unless he has spell resistance or, in case of scorching ray, fire resistance).


Rathendar wrote:

i do think that having DC scale up for spells of all levels to be based on the highest spell level you have to be a worthy consideration.

a 1st level wizard casts charm person and its 10+int bonus+1(spell level)

an 18th level wizard casts charm person and its 10+int bonus+ 9(highest spell level known)

to me, it feels like an archmage should have just more oomph to even his basic spells then an apprentice wizard.

in effect it would make the metamagic feat heighten spell obsolete as a side effect, but that wouldn't really make me lose any sleep.

I actually like this option.

Its not to drastic yet gives the caster's lower level spells a needed boost without being to over the top.


Jadeite wrote:
Squirrelloid wrote:


This is why multiclassing fails, because some people can't stand to see rules that actually make multiclassing work...

Seriously, no one will ever multiclass a caster with anything else except something that advances their casting without caster/character level transparency.

A level N character should cast a spell as a level N character. Otherwise that ability just isn't level appropriate and might as well not exist. Seriously, rather than take a level of wizard you could *take a cohort* who would cast better than you did, even for just that one spell, and you only sacrificed a feat instead of a whole level. (Take a level of fighter to reclaim the feat if you must - it'll be...

But what about multiclassed noncasters? Shouldn't a rogues sneak attack also scale with character level? What about barbarian rage or a paladin's smite? Should someone with a fighter level gain increased feat access? I understand your point, but your solution is too one-sided. You should either give some kind of character level based powers to all classes or to none at all.

Sneak Attack scales with number of attacks, which does scale with character level to a degree.

And feats should all be designed so they scale with character level (or at least some character levels). Some already do, at least sort of (like metamagic, because it scales with spell slot level, and feats like 3.5 Power Attack because it scaled with your BAB range).

Regardless, the analog to SA + feats isn't caster level, its spell slots. I'm not proposing you continue to get those - those depend on your spell progression and require relevant class levels. Caster Level = character level just means that when you use a spell, it does a level appropriate thing instead of something your cohort was doing 5 levels ago.

Pneumonica wrote:
Since when does multiclassing fail? As a long-time player of generalist characters, the only reason why you think multiclassing fails is because you fail at playing generalists.

Multiclassing into casting classes fails right now. It is never worth it. (Or multiclassing out of them into non-'PrCs designed for them'). This actually fixes that.

Dark Archive

Squirrelloid wrote:

(1) Your relevant level for anything is character level.

(2) Save DCs = 10 + 1/2 level + stat mod. This makes spells work like *every other fricking ability in the game*, as opposed to having their own bizarre system.

I'm definitely in favor of this, although I would point out that your relevant level to anything should be your *class level*, not character level. I agree that it would be a far better and logical system than the current one, *and* it would keep your low-level spells useful at higher levels, to boot.

Another option might be DC = 10 + 1/2 level + spell level, but then it would invalidate your primary attribute somewhat.


Squirrelloid wrote:


Sneak Attack scales with number of attacks, which does scale with character level to a degree.

And feats should all be designed so they scale with character level (or at least some character levels). Some already do, at least sort of (like metamagic, because it scales with spell slot level, and feats like 3.5 Power Attack because it scaled with your BAB range).

Regardless, the analog to SA + feats isn't caster level, its spell slots. I'm not proposing you continue to get those - those depend on your spell progression and require relevant class levels. Caster Level = character level just means that when you use a spell, it does a level appropriate thing instead of something your cohort was doing 5 levels ago.

If I understand you correctly, this is a good idea to fix the problem of with fighter/wizard multiclassers. I mean, the wizard does still get a 1 per 2 increase to BAB even though he doesn't have any fighter levels, why shouldn't the fighter levels count for *something* toward his wizarding abilities?

Caster Level equal Character level, spell DC = 10 + 1/2 Caster Level + ability modifier. So a Fighter 10/Wizard 10 is only casting 5th level spells, but he has a caster level of 20 and his spell DCs are 20 + ability modifier.

Hmmm. What about Paladins and Rangers, if they keep their spell advancement?


Stephen Klauk wrote:
Squirrelloid wrote:


Sneak Attack scales with number of attacks, which does scale with character level to a degree.

And feats should all be designed so they scale with character level (or at least some character levels). Some already do, at least sort of (like metamagic, because it scales with spell slot level, and feats like 3.5 Power Attack because it scaled with your BAB range).

Regardless, the analog to SA + feats isn't caster level, its spell slots. I'm not proposing you continue to get those - those depend on your spell progression and require relevant class levels. Caster Level = character level just means that when you use a spell, it does a level appropriate thing instead of something your cohort was doing 5 levels ago.

If I understand you correctly, this is a good idea to fix the problem of the problem with fighter/wizard multiclassers. I mean, the wizard does still get a 1 per 2 increase to BAB even though he doesn't have any fighter levels, why shouldn't the fighter levels count for *something* toward his wizarding abilities?

Caster Level equal Character level, spell DC = 10 + 1/2 Caster Level + ability modifier. So a Fighter 10/Wizard 10 is only casting 5th level spells, but he has a caster level of 20 and his spell DCs are 15 + ability modifier.

Hmmm. What about Paladins and Rangers, if they keep their spell advancement?

His DCs are actually 20+ability modifier (10+1/2*20 = 20), but that's seriously ok. In addition to them being 5th level spells, he also probably has a lower Int than the wizard. And as save DCs for CR 20 monsters are ballpark +20 or better on average.... He's actually capable of being at least somewhat useful against weaker monsters with magic, actually has a fair shot at SR (though probably didn't take Spell Penetration), and might make challenging monsters fail a save on 2-3 numbers instead of '1's. Its not overly impressive, but its something. And it means when the fighter/wizard casts GMW on his sword it (1) is as useful as if his buddy the wizard cast it, justifying his investment in magery and (2) it doesn't get trivially dispelled by the first caster they walk into when he drops a GDM or two on the party.

I am perfectly fine giving Rangers and Paladins 20th CL with DCs to match at 20th level. It doesn't bother me in the slightest.

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Roleplaying Game / Alpha Playtest Feedback / Alpha Release 2 / New Rules Suggestions / [Think Tank] Caster level based Save DC All Messageboards
Recent threads in New Rules Suggestions