|
Hrmm, perhaps for Create Water, the water is really being extracted from the nearby area, so applying it on an industrial scale might have unitended side effects, like drought.
That just shuffles around the issue. Now a group of evil cultists could sit in an underground chamber and create water to drain the villages water from crops, etc. It might make an interesting plotline, but when the party starts pondering whether or not they can use create water to sabotage some nearby foes water supplies (like those pesky kobolds in their trap-filled lair, hoping to dehydrate them out), it could get annoying.
Temporary created water (1 minute, unless consumed) seems like the best option.
Hrmm, perhaps for Create Water, the water is really being extracted from the nearby area, so applying it on an industrial scale might have unitended side effects, like drought.That just shuffles around the issue. Now a group of evil cultists could sit in an underground chamber and create water to drain the villages water from crops, etc. It might make an interesting plotline, but when the party starts pondering whether or not they can use create water to sabotage some nearby foes water supplies (like those pesky kobolds in their trap-filled lair, hoping to dehydrate them out), it could get annoying.
Temporary created water (1 minute, unless consumed) seems like the best option.
I've always assumed the elemental plain of water to be the likeliest source for magically "created" water. More like tapping an interplanar keg. A really big one. Seriously, the easiest solution is to place some fairly high limit on cantrips ( I had previously suggested the INT score as the number of cantrips per day -- or WIS for clerics orisons), so that they can be used frequently but not gratuitously. This gives the wizard / cleric quite a few to cast without unbalancing things.
The other alternative is to bump some cantrips / orisons back to 1st level. Like the ones that present an issue effecting the world at large... if the cantrip has that great a potential impact it isn't hard to consider that it might be misplaced at 0 level even if it seems a bit weak for 1st level on the surface.
I would much rather just make sure that the descriptions of the cantrips were clear rather than limiting them, even if its a high limit. A limit kind of goes against the idea that the wizard or cleric can always do something magical, and unlimited cantrips were made that way for exactly that purpose.
Clarifying that bonuses from the same source don't stack (i.e. no unlimited hit points or save bonuses), and perhaps either bumping create water up to 1st level (my preference, since it still makes it difficult for PCs to survive without planning for harsh terrain), or finding some way to limit the spell to point out that it has to be used right away or it disappears, would fix most of these problems.
They don't need to be scrapped, they only need to be clarified.
I would much rather just make sure that the descriptions of the cantrips were clear rather than limiting them, even if its a high limit. A limit kind of goes against the idea that the wizard or cleric can always do something magical, and unlimited cantrips were made that way for exactly that purpose.
Clarifying that bonuses from the same source don't stack (i.e. no unlimited hit points or save bonuses), and perhaps either bumping create water up to 1st level (my preference, since it still makes it difficult for PCs to survive without planning for harsh terrain), or finding some way to limit the spell to point out that it has to be used right away or it disappears, would fix most of these problems.
They don't need to be scrapped, they only need to be clarified.
I agree for the most part... but why do the casting types *always* have to have something magical to do? Rogues don't use their skills every round, fighters don't swing a sword every round (well, hopefully), why the "must have" magic every round? Sounds like 4E with it's daily, per encounter, at will powers. I don't know... I just think it's not a bad thing for low level casters to find their limits. To exhaust their magic and fall back on their wits. It happens to everybody else. A rogues skills fail, a fighter gets low on hp, and a wizard / caster runs out of magic. Pacing yourself was always part of the game. Hel... er heck, in 3E you got 1+ 1st level spells and 4 or so cantrips. Beats the "good old days" when you had 1, and only 1, 1st level spell... no chance of anything better. It's kind of like "magic inflation", everybody wants more, even at low level. And yes, I know fighters have more options, rogues more skills, etc. Just occasionally I'd like to see everybody deal with their characters limits instead of expanding them through the rules. *sigh* Old grognard rant over...
I think, ultimately, that's the biggest problem with this change. It completes the change from "Magic is mystical" to "Magic is different technology".
Sort of like the Science Fiction vs Fantasy debate over on the ENWorld forums.
I've always looked at the magic available in the standard setting and couldn't understand why people still walked around like it was medieval times. It's like humans lost all practicality in tool making and inventiveness when it came to magic.
It was okay back in the day when the "don't ask, don't tell" style of story worked. Players didn't think of scrying and speak with dead so much (not even sure if it was all that common in 2e... the cleric kept memorizing curative spells as I recall).
With 3e's steps towards world building and... well, not realism... perhaps "completeness"? I'm not a fan of the word simulationism... maybe, believability?
Yeah... with 3e's steps toward giving a more believable and complete world to work with*, one that was more internally consistent, it just felt strange that magic was still the outlier in the equation.
Which is why I've liked the campaign setting of Eberron so much more than Forgotten Realms... it strived to make sense of how magic would be used by an industrious intelligence.
.
I totally understand how someone might not want this. It's like saying you'd rather read a fantasy book about good overcoming evil and survive harsh conflicts in the process... rather than reading a science fiction book about how they discovered some new theoretical equation that when put to practical use, in a certain way or combined with already known technology, was able to overcome some impending doom.
Willow vs The Andromeda Strain. Tolkien vs Gibson. Faerun vs Eberron. Finite Spells vs Unlimited Cantrips.
It's really a matter of taste in the campaign setting, not really a matter of "broken" or "overpowered".
.
* I'm not saying that 3e is perfect in this, just that it went so much more further than previous editions had ever gone with this particular goal.
I think, ultimately, that's the biggest problem with this change. It completes the change from "Magic is mystical" to "Magic is different technology".
*snip*
It's really a matter of taste in the campaign setting, not really a matter of "broken" or "overpowered".
I'd say you summed it up pretty well. I play SF RPGs as well (Traveller to be precise) and I like to keep my games seperate from each other. I want my Traveller to feel gritty / realistic / technical and my D&D to be gritty / medieval / fantasy, not technology dressed up as magic. Hmm... closer than I'd have thought... oh, well. I like "gritty":) And I hear someone quoting Asimov somewhere... in Traveller we leave that bit about sufficiently advanced technology being indistinguishable from magic to Grandfather and the other Ancients :D
Just a minor note on the original "Message" spell problem (already mostly resolved by noting the range): Message also requires a path of effect. Doesn't need a line, just some way from one person to the other - so if you seal them off (a good tight trapdoor that flips back up say) - Message no problem - and things all the spookier when they get "Oh no! I've.......[silence]".
|
|
Just a minor note on the original "Message" spell problem (already mostly resolved by noting the range): Message also requires a path of effect. Doesn't need a line, just some way from one person to the other - so if you seal them off (a good tight trapdoor that flips back up say) - Message no problem - and things all the spookier when they get "Oh no! I've.......[silence]".
Now I'm picturing a split up party;
"Multiple monsters, in front and behind, they're coming out of the ceiling..." [connection cut]
I think my main complaint is that "at will" powers can break an encounter. While it's unlikely in most situations, it can happen: Assassin vines have a movement of 5 feet and a reach of 20ft. If someone like the ranger or the rogue spots it, then the wizard can "ray of frost" until it's dead because it's so slow. No-one uses up any resourses.
At higher levels, a mage can cast "Force Cage" then do "ping" damage on the creature until it's dead while everyone sits back and takes a snooze.
This is how I'm doing it: Cast a # of times/day = to INT
If you meditate for 10 mins then it resets the limit back to Zero.I'd considered this, but figured it wasn't fair for wizards and was opening a can of worms:
1. Cast limit = Stat, if you don't meditate then,
2. After every casting thereafter make a spellcraft dc=10+1/casting, if you fail, you take subdual damage. (kind of like the rules for forced march)
frankly i think a 1d3 at will is less game breaking than a sorcerers 1d6+(1/2 level) which i have heard no one complain about yet. While a limit might be needed for cantrips, you can't do that without nerfing the sorcerer ability as well.
Couldn't we just make Create Water a 1st level spell?
I personally don't like at-will Mending. Whats the point of damaging some magic weapon or suit of armour [from DM's point of view] if the PC's can just cast Mending continually until its fixed? And if you're the player you can now Sunder away and not worry about the hassle of repairing the mashed up loot.
I changed Mending so that it no longer mends anything Magical.
Mending only fixes ordinary rents and cracks in ordinary objects it will do absolutely NOTHING for magic items that have been sundered. That has always been the default ruling.
You need to read page 111 Alpha3 where it states the following..This spell repairs damaged objects, restoring 1d4 hit
points to the object. If the object has the broken condition,
this condition is removed if the object is restored to full
hit points. All of the pieces of an object must be present
for this spell to function. Magic items can be repaired by
this spell, but you must have an equal or higher caster level
than the object for the spell to function. Magic items that
are broken (at 0 hit points or less) can be repaired with this
spell, but this spell does not restore their magic abilities.
This spell does not affect creatures (including constructs).
This spell has no effect on objects that have been warped
or otherwise transmuted, but it can still repair damage
done to such items.
The bolded section is something of a typo. It should read as "destroyed" according to the sunder description in the PDF. Anything with less than full HP but more than 0 is broken, while anything with 0 is destroyed.
Still, I don't understand the delimma here. It mends the object, yes, but it does not repair the magics of a destroyed item. This means that sundering as a DM is still a viable combat tactic. Sure, if you only damage the fighters +2 Holy Flaming sword (passed down through generations and upon which his entire character is based), he'll take some penalties for the combat, but he'll also have it repaired in fairly short order afterwards. If however, you drop it to 0, he's not getting it back (a major character blow, and golden opportunity for both the DM and players to plant new plot/character hooks) without special DM questing or a high level "Make Whole". He could mend to his hearts content, and at the end of the day, all he's getting back is a masterwork sword, a far cry from being as good as what he lost.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
I'd like to see some sort of a limit. At low levels, detect magic is being used to auto-find magical traps (finding magic items doesn't bug me), and all non-combat skill checks are at a permanent +1 due to guidance. Resistance is starting to be kept up at all times as well. In general, it isn't game breaking, but very much game altering.
|
I'd like to see some sort of a limit. At low levels, detect magic is being used to auto-find magical traps (finding magic items doesn't bug me), and all non-combat skill checks are at a permanent +1 due to guidance. Resistance is starting to be kept up at all times as well. In general, it isn't game breaking, but very much game altering.
Have Nystul's be part of the trap, so it can't be found with detect magic..(don't have my books at work, is that how that works?)
Declare it's dormant until triggered...?
|
Slightly off topic here, but I made 0-level spells spontaneous rather than at-will prior to the advent of PFRPG. This means the party casters need not prepare them in advance but are limited to the stated number for their caster level per day. It is a strong balance between caster's freedom and game control and has worked very well for my group. The "infinite gain" issues are all but eliminated and yet the players feel like they have far more power and flexibility at their disposal.
If unlimited cantrrips are being abused, limit them. Pick some fairly high number (more than they used to get in 3.5) that allows them to be used frequently, but doesn't mean they cast one every round just to do it. Say their number of cantrips = their Intelligence, double the old number and add a bonuc for intelligence, or something like that. Whatever works. It is an Alpha afterall. Experiment. See what works / fits. And try not to get snippy with eachother people... I like my boards friendly :D
A first logical step would be to have bonus spells for cantrips too. It's easy to extrapolate the bonus spell progression for cantrips from the bonus spells table.
I like cantrips at will. If a DM truly feels that any particular use has an unbalancing effect then he/she should think a little deeper about the circumstance and logically and reasonably "fix" the issue.
For example: in the "fill the pit full of water to avoid a climb check" scenerio. Is this pit made of tupperware and completely water tight? If so wouldnt it have already filled full of water over time from other sources, such as ground water seepage? Over the course of the calculated 6.5 Hours it took to fill the pit much of that would have seeped through the earth and out the bottom. Furthermore 6.5 HOURS hanging out in a dungeon really should have "unforseen" consequences (monster patrol maybe).
Bottom line. Casters do mundane things(lift, carry, cook, travel, ect) with magic becuase they cant do them without it.
THere is nothing that having cantrips at will that is unbalancing. just adds flavor. Mage throws ray of frost at his captors where a fighter would be throwing rocks. The difference isnt overbalancing.
Oh, and a word on magic traps.
Detect magic isnt an auto trap finder.
The magic aura could easily be concealed by non magical means. If I were making a magical trap I would create it then cover it with something that blocks magic detection. The spell formerly known as Nystrals(however its spelled) magic aura would do the trick, but it would be expensive.
Just place the enchanted part of the trap behind a small outcropping(hole, around a corner,slight incline)or basically anything that blocks line of sight prior to the actual "trap zone." Detect magic would be able to see it, but by the time the character had line of sight it would be too late. I can see a mage saying "TRA--- *boom*"
D&D is a game where the DM needs generally be abouy 5% more clever than the players. If your DM is having issues, offer him/her a possible solution to your trick. Just wait until you get to use the trick a few times first. ;-)
