This is of particular concern to casters who get very limited spell selections and slow replacement.
I've never liked that certain spells don't scale at all with level. E.g. Daze Monster hits up to 6 HD of creatures and will never go above that, so unless you happen to torment a lot of smaller towns, it effectively becomes an undead slot only coming up when certain specific situations come about.
Shouldn't spells like Daze Monster get some scaling mechanic so that they stay useful a little longer?
Why not 5 HD + 1 per 5 levels up to 9 HD? This would at least keep it closer to where it needed to be while not completely negating the need for spells that do more.
This is of particular concern to casters who get very limited spell selections and slow replacement.
I've never liked that certain spells don't scale at all with level. E.g. Daze Monster hits up to 6 HD of creatures and will never go above that, so unless you happen to torment a lot of smaller towns, it effectively becomes an undead slot only coming up when certain specific situations come about.
Shouldn't spells like Daze Monster get some scaling mechanic so that they stay useful a little longer?
Why not 5 HD + 1 per 5 levels up to 9 HD? This would at least keep it closer to where it needed to be while not completely negating the need for spells that do more.
I know what you mean, but you run into a problem here.
In your example of Daze Monster, how often is a 16th level caster going to fight a 9 HD monster. Go look up those CR 16 monsters and check their HD.
While your idea is well-intended, your example doesn't fix the problem. Daze Monster in this example scales too slowly to be useful.
Then there is the other side of the coin. Make it scale fast enough thta it remains useful to all casters of all levels. This sounds like a good idea, but if we really did that, with no caps, then all we would need is our first level spell list. The other 8 levels would have a few things not available at level 1. Invisibility, Haste, Fireball, Teleport, a few others. Each level after level 1 could be just the two or three unique spells (which also scale). Heck, the only thing we might need at level 9 is Gate and Wish - anything else could be handled by a scaled lower-level spell.
I'm not even saying that's necessarily a bad idea. Maybe having 100 spells in the book that scale would make the game simpler, easier for spellcasters and DM alike, without robbing any of the fun.
But it is a big revamp.
This is of particular concern to casters who get very limited spell selections and slow replacement.
I've never liked that certain spells don't scale at all with level. E.g. Daze Monster hits up to 6 HD of creatures and will never go above that, so unless you happen to torment a lot of smaller towns, it effectively becomes an undead slot only coming up when certain specific situations come about.
Shouldn't spells like Daze Monster get some scaling mechanic so that they stay useful a little longer?
Why not 5 HD + 1 per 5 levels up to 9 HD? This would at least keep it closer to where it needed to be while not completely negating the need for spells that do more.
I know what you mean, but you run into a problem here.
In your example of Daze Monster, how often is a 16th level caster going to fight a 9 HD monster. Go look up those CR 16 monsters and check their HD.
While your idea is well-intended, your example doesn't fix the problem. Daze Monster in this example scales too slowly to be useful.
It's not an all-or-nothing issue though. There's going to be a happy medium where it does scale closely enough. And yes it would be a largish change.
Maybe +3 is better past when you get the spell so
6 HD plus one HD per level additional levels.
Though we sometimes do tend to see lower level mobs (or lots of them) at higher levels. We might see 15 avg party HD - 4 mobs in a fight.
I'm not even saying that's necessarily a bad idea. Maybe having 100 spells in the book that scale would make the game simpler, easier for spellcasters and DM alike, without robbing any of the fun. But it is a big revamp.
I actually like that idea, and maybe one day, when Paizo decides to do an "all paizo designed next edition" that does not have to slavishly adhere to backwards compatibility, MAYBE they might do something like that. I have for some time wished they (the figurative "they" meaning, whomever the powers that be currently are) would release two versions of D&D, one that remains as simple and uncomplicated as possible (yet still fun, geared for the young, the beginners, or the casual gamers, and another version, sort of like the old Advanced moniker, where it would dig deep into some more complicated subjects or take more chances with rules systems. I'd actually buy both because I could run the basic version for my kids and for family members/friends as an "intro to d&d" and then I could run the more involved version for my highly experienced group.
This "advanced" version could throw out tons of old concepts and try completely crazy things like a classless system where characters are built by choosing from an assortment of abilities, etc.
Just some pipe-dreams here, carry on :)
I'm not even saying that's necessarily a bad idea. Maybe having 100 spells in the book that scale would make the game simpler, easier for spellcasters and DM alike, without robbing any of the fun. But it is a big revamp.I actually like that idea, and maybe one day, when Paizo decides to do an "all paizo designed next edition" that does not have to slavishly adhere to backwards compatibility, MAYBE they might do something like that. I have for some time wished they (the figurative "they" meaning, whomever the powers that be currently are) would release two versions of D&D, one that remains as simple and uncomplicated as possible (yet still fun, geared for the young, the beginners, or the casual gamers, and another version, sort of like the old Advanced moniker, where it would dig deep into some more complicated subjects or take more chances with rules systems. I'd actually buy both because I could run the basic version for my kids and for family members/friends as an "intro to d&d" and then I could run the more involved version for my highly experienced group.
This "advanced" version could throw out tons of old concepts and try completely crazy things like a classless system where characters are built by choosing from an assortment of abilities, etc.
Just some pipe-dreams here, carry on :)
When they're ready to do this Classless system, have them give me a call. I have a homemade system already written up and playtested, fully classless, with its own unique spell system, and it's even somewhat D&D compatible so I could use storebought adventures with only some modification. And it's playtested too.
When they're ready to do this Classless system, have them give me a call. I have a homemade system already written up and playtested, fully classless, with its own unique spell system, and it's even somewhat D&D compatible so I could use storebought adventures with only some modification. And it's playtested too.
I'd love to take a look at that system if you didn't mind sharing it?
When they're ready to do this Classless system, have them give me a call. I have a homemade system already written up and playtested, fully classless, with its own unique spell system, and it's even somewhat D&D compatible so I could use storebought adventures with only some modification. And it's playtested too.I'd love to take a look at that system if you didn't mind sharing it?
Heh, sorry, it's way to big to easily share, but worse, half of it is handwritten stuff - not a problem for starting to create an official published system from the ground up, but a big problem for sharing.
Heh, sorry, it's way to big to easily share, but worse, half of it is handwritten stuff - not a problem for starting to create an official published system from the ground up, but a big problem for sharing.
Drat. The way too big part I could have gotten around, but the handwritten part would be a tad tricky. Oh well :(
I've never liked that certain spells don't scale at all with level. E.g. Daze Monster hits up to 6 HD of creatures and will never go above that, so unless you happen to torment a lot of smaller towns, it effectively becomes an undead slot only coming up when certain specific situations come about.
I agree that spells that become completely useless because you level past their HD cap are a bad idea. Spontaneous casters never take them because they will become obsolete and prepared casters stop memorizing them past a certain level. Changing them from n HD of creatures to n HD + 1/x Levels (I'm using variables since I'm not entirely sure what the best numbers to use should be) is a really good idea. It maintains limits but allows the spell to retain some level of usefulness throughout the caster's career.
Then there is the other side of the coin. Make it scale fast enough thta it remains useful to all casters of all levels. This sounds like a good idea, but if we really did that, with no caps, then all we would need is our first level spell list. The other 8 levels would have a few things not available at level 1. Invisibility, Haste, Fireball, Teleport, a few others. Each level after level 1 could be just the two or three unique spells (which also scale). Heck, the only thing we might need at level 9 is Gate and Wish - anything else could be handled by a scaled lower-level spell.
This would be true for damage dice caps, but we are talking about maximum number of HD affected caps.
When the higher level spell that becomes obsolete is the same spell with a higher HD cap (Sleep -> Deep Slumber), then I can't say it is a bad thing. In some cases those lower level spells are obsoleted by better effects (Daze Monster -> Hold Monster), so even with the cap removed they are still good for the slot they take up, but there are better options at higher levels. No one is saying 1st level spells should always remain the best option, but that they should...
An additional effect you could add on to affect X HD of monsters is that if you're spell affects less HD than the target it still works, but the target gets a bonus to their save. This mixed with the n HD + x/level formula would fix most of the problems with fixed HD spells while still making higher level spells (with their lower saves) more viable.
|
Personally I think the fact that some spells don't scale quickly or at all is just part of the flavor of magic in Dungeons and Dragons.
Maybe that's just me though...
As a DM I have no problem adding in fodder monsters that are still affected by those kinds of spells. A CR 1 monster may not be much of a hindrance, but it's also not worth any experience and can get flanking or aid another bonuses to the other monsters.
A CR 1 Kobold Sorcerer has a few magic missile to annoy people with after all.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
My fix for this was an adaptation of Heighten Spell. In addition to raising spell level in terms of save DCs and bypassing globe of invulnerability or other level-dependent effects, I added the notion that every 2 levels by which you heightened the spell, any fixed effects (either max level affected or total levels affected) would increase by 50% of the original, while damage die caps would be increased by 5.
So a circle of death, to which both applied, heightened to 8th level could affect up to 25d4 total HD (though still only 1d4/level), and it could also affect creatures up to 12 HD (50% more than normal).
If you were epic enough to Heighten it to 10th level, it could affect up to 30d4, and creatures up to 16 HD.
A 3rd level sleep would get up to 6 HD of creatures, while a deep slumber heightened to 9th level (and so gaining 3 "2-level" increases) would affect 25 HD (10 + 3x (50% of 10 = 5)).
A fireball heightened to 5th level would have a die cap of 15d6, just like the benchmark 5th level evocation (cone of cold).
Bear in mind, the spell is not empowered and so does not inherently cause more damage; it simply uses a damage die/hit dice cap that is appropriate for its new level.
Example:
A 10th level wizard with 20 INT casts heightened fireball with a 5th level slot. It does 10d6 (DC 20).
The same guy casts an empowered fireball and it does 15d6 (DC 18).
Fast forward the same guy to 15th level, however, and now he's doing 15d6 (DC 20) with Heighten but still doing 15d6 (DC 18) with Empower.
Anyway, just a notion...
I'd love to take a look at that system if you didn't mind sharing it?
I've got a draft classless, skill-based system (a la GURPS or Shadowrun 4e) designed to be fully compatible with Pathfinder Beta rules. Classless characters can be used with Paizo products with no additional prep time. Be warned, though: starting characters are weaker in some ways, stronger in others, because of the choices they make -- hyper-specialization is a risk.
My fix for this was an adaptation of Heighten Spell. In addition to raising spell level in terms of save DCs and bypassing globe of invulnerability or other level-dependent effects, I added the notion that every 2 levels by which you heightened the spell, any fixed effects (either max level affected or total levels affected) would increase by 50% of the original, while damage die caps would be increased by 5.
So a circle of death, to which both applied, heightened to 8th level could affect up to 25d4 total HD (though still only 1d4/level), and it could also affect creatures up to 12 HD (50% more than normal).
If you were epic enough to Heighten it to 10th level, it could affect up to 30d4, and creatures up to 16 HD.
A 3rd level sleep would get up to 6 HD of creatures, while a deep slumber heightened to 9th level (and so gaining 3 "2-level" increases) would affect 25 HD (10 + 3x (50% of 10 = 5)).
A fireball heightened to 5th level would have a die cap of 15d6, just like the benchmark 5th level evocation (cone of cold).
Bear in mind, the spell is not empowered and so does not inherently cause more damage; it simply uses a damage die/hit dice cap that is appropriate for its new level.
Example:
A 10th level wizard with 20 INT casts heightened fireball with a 5th level slot. It does 10d6 (DC 20).
The same guy casts an empowered fireball and it does 15d6 (DC 18).
Fast forward the same guy to 15th level, however, and now he's doing 15d6 (DC 20) with Heighten but still doing 15d6 (DC 18) with Empower.
Anyway, just a notion...
Hmm, these are all interesting. I shall have to consider it.
Non-scaling spells is one (of many) reasons I prefer psionic powers to arcane & divine spells. The Expanded Psionic Handbook does a great job of scaling/augmenting the powers (not all can be increased by any means).
Jason, I like your method of scaling spells.