|
Title says it all. I was looking through the cost of certain words relative to the cost of spell levels, and some of them seem a bit wonky.
1) Given that my FIRST idea was to go and make a spell like Burning Hands, but with different elements, I was frustrated to learn that it's basically impossible. Both acid AND cold have inherent effects placed within them, which I don't think is a good thing for variety, and should be removed from a number of words, even if they fit thematically.
2) Some spell effects seem misplaced. For example, the 9th level Sorcerer/Wizard Fire word is limited to Single Target, but the 8th level Fire word has no limitations, and deals 1d8/level, whereas the 9th level word deals 1d6/level with the target limitation.
Yes, I realize that I haven't playtested it, and these observations are based on my first viewing of the words, but there seems to be much lower versatility than I would have expected.
One recommendation I would have, right off the bat, is that you separate damage words and debilitating words, instead of having many of them be tied together. Leave the damage words as the damage they currently do, but decrease the cost, scaling with the cost of each word. After doing so, add boosting effects after the thought that either:
A) Increase the damage of damage spells
or
B Increase the effect strength OR hit dice limit of debilitating spells
I feel like this may be what people had in mind while designing this playtest, but it doesn't look like it would work in practice. By implementing the above suggestion, you would truly make spellcasters choose between wanting to Blast away, or act in a more Controller-esque fashion. Of course, you could apply the changes I mentioned to the buff spells as well.
I know the idea is that Wordcasters have a great deal more flexibility than the average spellcaster, and that's alright. I get that. But there are levels when very specific spells become available that seem to drastically increase a caster's power (3rd, 5th, and 7th-9th spell levels) where it feels like the Wordcaster could be left in the dust due to the spell costs.
*Note: I also heard someone suggesting implementing duration as a word power. I approve.
I thought the same thing about True Fire (the 9th level Fire ability) for a minute, but go back and look at the description again. No Save, No SR. You just take CLd6 Fire damage. The d8/CL spell allows a save and SR, and so has a much higher chance of doing less or even no damage to a target.
I think that removal of saving throw and/or SR in such instances would be better resolved with appropriate boost option to existing words instead of multipling number of existing effect words.
And I agree with the notion that debilitating effects inherent in Acid, Ice and Electrcity words should be separated from damage and available as separate words which, when joined with energy damage words would be limited to certain types of energy.
I would love to see the side effects separated from the damage itself. Why not stagger someone with fire, for example, rather than cold?
I would love to see the side effects separated from the damage itself. Why not stagger someone with fire, for example, rather than cold?
Yeah, or set fire to people with ice?
Yeah, or set fire to people with ice?
frostfire bolt!
Hmmm... Wait, this is d20... How it was caled? A, yes, rimfire bolt!
Yeah, or set fire to people with ice?frostfire bolt!
Hmmm... Wait, this is d20... How it was caled? A, yes, rimfire bolt!
Sure you dont mean Rimefire bolt?
I would love to see the side effects separated from the damage itself. Why not stagger someone with fire, for example, rather than cold?
+1 on this.
Don't forget that Words are supposed to be about versatility. Keep in mind the Sorc bloodlines that can covert energies when making the system.
It's worth noting that Wordcasters seem to benefit greatly from bonus spell slots, as these translate into more available points. This combined with the a bility to skimp on some prepared spells, either by not preparing all slots or by only preparing the minimums for some slots, kind of makes the high cost necessary.
For example (and please check my math, I'm doing this on an ipod) at level 15, the wizard wordcaster has 350 total points available to divvy up among his slots, plus anothe 246 points from bonus slots for high int and school specialization. Between Word Burning and under preparing, a word caster can work with the relative high cost quite nicely.
I would love to see the side effects separated from the damage itself. Why not stagger someone with fire, for example, rather than cold?+1 on this.
And here's a BIG +2 on this as well.
Sure you dont mean Rimefire bolt?
Letter-eating gremlin has infested my keyboard again.
<purges keyboard with meteor swarm>
+5 Vorpal!And here's a BIG +2 on this as well.I would love to see the side effects separated from the damage itself. Why not stagger someone with fire, for example, rather than cold?+1 on this.
So long as we're voting, I'll put a -1 on it. Sorry, but that was my favorite part! Otherwise there really isn't any real difference between the elements.
Though I would have preferred text in there along the lines of "if the target does not take any damage, they are not subject to the secondary condition" - so that way I could get a Ring of Cold Resistance to avoid the staggered condition. (and it kinda makes sense in my head)
I think divorcing could be a good idea, for such as this :
Staggered : This word must be combined with another word that damages a target (or more than one target). If the target fails a fortitude save, they gain the Staggered condition for one round. If the spell fails to damage the target, they automatically succeed their saving throw.
NOTE: This word may not be combined with Fire or Acid damages, only Cold, Force, and Lightning.
I think divorcing could be a good idea, for such as this :
Staggered : This word must be combined with another word that damages a target (or more than one target). If the target fails a fortitude save, they gain the Staggered condition for one round. If the spell fails to damage the target, they automatically succeed their saving throw.
NOTE: This word may not be combined with Fire or Acid damages, only Cold, Force, and Lightning.
Bah! The less limitations the better I say.
Disallowing certain conditions to be combined with certain energy types, or forcing one to combine them with a damaging effect in the first place, does little more than limit the imagination and number of combos you could put together.
Unless they truly divide everything, the designers aren't going to get the kind of versatility that they speak of.
Also, you wouldn't have just a small number of energy options. You could have one with a save, one without a save, one with spell resistance, one without spell resistance, or any combo thereof. The ones with less means to defend against would have much higher level associations and point values.
|
|
See, this is where I start sort of poking into Psionics territory, and I don't know how people will feel about that.
Okay, so, I made a test sorcerer, and built some test spells for myself, and I have to say, I was pretty happy with it. Between summoning, Buffing, and debuffing, I had a pretty good system, especially once you start getting higher level words. While I'm still not sure how they're going to handle bonus spells from bloodlines, school focus, etc., I feel like the spells I could craft, in some ways, held up to my expectations.
However, as a few people have pointed out with this thread, I don't like effects being tied to certain elemental types. What if I don't want the extra cost of staggering somebody with Cold?
My suggestion? I think what we need to do is totally remove minimum spell levels from existing effects. Yes, I'm serious. As it stands, minimum spell level doesn't do much for the effects other than dictate power, but really, even if, say, a 1st level sorcerer had access to Acid Wave, it wouldn't matter because he doesn't have access to that word anyways. This way, when the sorcerer finally has the points to put into creating a spell with Acid Wave as a part of it, he can do it, which is what he'd be able to do anyways.
In addition, I'd like to see fewer words, with more boosting effects. For example: Flame Jet and Burning Flash are, essentially, the same thing. Why do we need a different spell level available for them? Wouldn't it just be easier to say:
Boost: By increasing the cost of Flame Jet from 2 to (4?), Flame Jet deals damage equal to your caster level (Maximum 5d4). By further increasing the cost to 5, Flame Jet instead deals 1d6 damage per caster level (Maximum 5d6).
Okay, I know my wording may not be the best, but you could spell out a system for determining cost increase. So, for example, all elemental words, as far as damage is concerned, would have a scaling point cost based on what you wanted to accomplish. Perhaps you wanted to bump the maximum caster level for the above Flame Jet wording so that you could do up to 10d6 damage with it. Just incorporate that into the wording as a boost for it, adding a number of points that would place it in a level appropriate spot.
You could do this for most spells, as there are many ways in which even status effects stack upon each other (dazed, stunned, paralyzed... shaken, frightened, etc.) I feel like there is too much worrying determining spell level by using the highest level effect. Why not just determine spell level by point total? That way there's no confusion about the spell level, and effects are a bit easier to discern.
In addition, we need to remove the duration and range limitations inherent in some spell effects. Why can't I create a spell that deals lightning damage to an enemy over X rounds (a la Storm Cloud or something?) Why can't I use the Echo "Cantrip" to cause it to ring from multiple areas? (Which would be AWESOME). Despite the title of this thread, I wouldn't even mind bumping up the point cost of words if it meant we could really get some more versatility out of them. Imagine if I could pull of a group Fearball, a medium range Spook which explodes in a 20' radius and inflicts Cramp?? Yeah, I know you can Mass Spook, but I want my Fearball XD
Edit: Yes, I know my above suggestion would make spontaneous casters WAY better than prepared spellcasters. My solution? Either:
A) Have spontaneous casters learn more words at a fairly slow rate. Basically, simplify a lot of the categories, but have them be forced to learn every word for range, targetting, and duration, other than things like "Single" and "Instantaneous".
B) Provide a very slight word cost reduction for prepared wordcasters. Perhaps that time spent preparing them allows wizard to produce more efficient, flowing words and, as such, can prepare more powerful spells than spontaneous casters. However, since they have to prepare them at the beginning of the day, they still aren't quite as "versatile".
You get and use your bonus spells normally. I specifically says this in the playtest document.
|
Sure you dont mean Rimefire bolt?Yeah, or set fire to people with ice?frostfire bolt!
Hmmm... Wait, this is d20... How it was caled? A, yes, rimfire bolt!
There are so many horribly twisted and WRONG things I can say about that last one... so many.
As for the question at hand...
Removing the level requirements from the words does sound oddly ok... but it would need EXTENSIVE testing to make sure it doesn't have too many loopholes. Some are ok... but it has a limit.